[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [rfc] Near-constant time directory index for Ext2

On 21-Feb-2001 Martin Mares wrote:
> Hello!
>> To have O(1) you've to have the number of hash entries > number of files and
>> a
>> really good hasing function.
> No, if you enlarge the hash table twice (and re-hash everything) every time
> the
> table fills up, the load factor of the table keeps small and everything is
> O(1)
> 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.

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:17    [W:0.194 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site