3 ms·
I wonder at their scale, why wouldn’t it make sense to store the entries lightly compressed in memory?
by squirrellous 1mo ago
I wonder at their scale, why wouldn’t it make sense to store the entries lightly compressed in memory?
- winrid 1mo agoYeah with snappy they probably could get like 30% savings (I bet domains don't compress well) without much more cpu usage. Alternatively a btree somehow they can take advantage of prefix compression
- squirrellous 1mo agoAh yes, something like prefix tree would work well storing reverse domain names like com.abc.www (although this is such a well known thing I feel like I must be missing things).
- akoboldfrying 1mo agoDefinitely. Even a custom compression/encoding that knows to treat the different fields differently -- just a 4-byte binary IP address for A records, normal LZ-based text compression of the domain name (perhaps using a custom starting dictionary and/or Huffman table), etc.