4 ms·
Isn't a faster way to, instead of using a backing array, to use a pool of memory that you just point into with pointers addressed with the hash? Nasty stuff th
by winrid 6y ago
Isn't a faster way to, instead of using a backing array, to use a pool of memory that you just point into with pointers addressed with the hash?
Nasty stuff that you can do in a language like C :)
- ufo 6y agoAs far as the CPU is concerned, there isn't a big difference if you access a block of memory via pointers or via an array. Converting the hash result to a memory address is not the bottleneck. The main bottlenecks are the hash function itself and the logic for dealing with collusions
- winrid 6y agoI definitely agree that is where the main bottlenecks are!