[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14769?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17452462#comment-17452462
]
Konstantin Orlov commented on IGNITE-14769:
-------------------------------------------
[~agura], could you please give an advice on what do you think is better hash
function according to the results above?
> Key hash calculation.
> ---------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-14769
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14769
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Andrey Mashenkov
> Assignee: Konstantin Orlov
> Priority: Major
> Labels: iep-54, ignite-3
> Attachments: Partition count 100.png, Partition count 1024 (rnd).png,
> Partition count 1024.png, Partition count 128 (rnd).png, Partition count
> 128.png, Partition count 16 (rnd).png, Partition count 32.png, Partition
> count 480 (rnd).png, Partition count 480.png, Partition count 8.png
>
> Original Estimate: 96h
> Remaining Estimate: 96h
>
> There are next possible ways for cache calculation.
> # Update hash on every write method call as it works for now.
> # Calculate for all key chunk (hash of byte[]) - all columns including a
> null-map.
> Let's choose and implement the best way and along with a better hash function,
> e.g. xxHash64 [1], Murmur3 [2]released in Apache Commons, CityHash (from
> Google) [3], FastHash32 [4].
>
> [1][https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/]
> [2][https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-codec/jacoco/org.apache.commons.codec.digest/MurmurHash3.java.html]
> [3] [https://github.com/google/cityhash]
> [4] [https://github.com/rurban/smhasher/blob/master/fasthash.cpp]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
