Re: No 100 HZ timer!

[Jamie Lokier]

george anzinger wrote:
> > > a.) list insertion of an arbitrary timer,
> > should be O(log(n)) at worst
> > 
> > > b.) removal of canceled and expired timers, and
> > easy to make O(1)
> 
> I thought this was true also, but the priority heap structure that has
> been discussed here has a O(log(n)) removal time.

Several priority queue structures support removal in O(1) time.
Perhaps you are thinking of the classic array-based heap, for
which removal is O(log n) in the general case.

-- Jamie