> which depend on the probing strategy Not only. Resizing can involve rehashing all of the existing entries (unless you lose memory by storing the full hash va

> which depend on the probing strategy Not only. Resizing can involve rehashing all of the existing entries (unless you lose memory by storing the full hash values all the time, then it still involves copying and reallocation). If without open addressing you can get by with much less resizing and with worse (but faster) hashing function (although modern languages often have to use non-trivial hashing functions to prevent some kinds of attacks), it's tricky to find under which circumstances open addressing is cheaper: again, microbenchmarks aren't the complete story, the real-world uses where users grow the hashes are: what are the typical sizes? The typical occurrences of regrows? The good solution behaves good for a typical case (where a lot of the hashes are probably quite small9 and for the typical "big" case where some hashes grow significantly.