>>> The Lee-Man <leeman.dun...@gmail.com> schrieb am 24.11.2014 um 18:04 in
Nachricht <dfb5172f-05e8-4027-867e-8e2b1969f...@googlegroups.com>:
[...]
> Here's the problem: the submitted patch makes this
> particular use case O(1). You can't get much faster

Are you sure? You modified the compare function used by sort. Even if the list 
is sorted before you add a new entry at the end, more tan one call to the 
compare function is performed (unless I miss the obvious). Typically the best 
you can get is like O(log2(n)) (for binary search)

> than that, i.e. it takes a fixed time no matter how
> many sessions are present.
> 
> The only patches I can come up with make that
> search take O(n). That's because the only

If you search for the extreme value of an unsorted list with n elements, you 
can't beat that. That's why you (build and) sort the list if it's intended to 
be searched more than once, I guess.

> way other than caching to find the "last session
> used" is to search through the session list.
> 
[...]


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to