4 ms·
One thing not mentioned: very often "give up and allow a not-quite-perfect hash" is a reasonable solution.
by o11c 1y ago
One thing not mentioned: very often "give up and allow a not-quite-perfect hash" is a reasonable solution.
- hinkley 1y agoI believe there are some high concurrency hash tables out there where the data structure contains two tables, and so each get results in a constant number of fetches, but the count is almost always greater than one. But if it avoids concurrency issues that ends up being acceptable. I remember Cliff Click presenting one that was lockless and if I'm recalling correctly, where capacity growth operations could happen in parallel with reads. And possibly writes.