Re: [rfc] Near-constant time directory index for Ext2
Davide Libenzi (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:59:03 -0800 (PST)
On 21-Feb-2001 Martin Mares wrote:
>> To have O(1) you've to have the number of hash entries > number of files and
>> really good hasing function.
> No, if you enlarge the hash table twice (and re-hash everything) every time
> table fills up, the load factor of the table keeps small and everything is
> amortized, of course if you have a good hashing function. If you are really
> smart and re-hash incrementally, you can get O(1) worst case complexity, but
> the multiplicative constant is large.
My personal preference goes to skiplist coz it doesn't have fixed ( or growing
) tables to handle. You've simply a stub of data togheter with FS data in each
And performance ( O(log2(n)) ) are the same for whatever number of entries.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/