> But it is, and that's precisely the reason why hash tables are not O(1) but rather O(log(n)) I'm sorry, but as a reader it is quite amusing that various post

> But it is, and that's precisely the reason why hash tables are not O(1) but rather O(log(n)) I'm sorry, but as a reader it is quite amusing that various posters are claiming (all without citing any sources) hashtables are O(1), O(n) and O(log(n))