I ran a bakeoff between your new half-md4 and dx_hack_hash on Ext2. As
predicted, half-md4 does produce very even bucket distributions. For 200,000
creates:
half-md4: 2872 avg bytes filled per 4k block (70%)
dx_hack_hash: 2853 avg bytes filled per 4k block (69%)
but guess which was faster overall?
half-md4: user 0.43 system 6.88 real 0:07.33 CPU 99%
dx_hack_hash: user 0.43 system 6.40 real 0:06.82 CPU 100%
This is quite reproducible: dx_hack_hash is always faster by about 6%. This
must be due entirely to the difference in hashing cost, since half-md4
produces measurably better distributions. Now what do we do?
By the way, I'm running about 37 usec per create here, on a 1GHz/1GB PIII,
with Ext2. I think most of the difference vs your timings is that your test
code is eating a lot of cpu.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/