On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Christian Heimes <li...@cheimes.de> wrote: > Am 02.01.2012 01:37, schrieb Jim Jewett: >> Well, there is nothing wrong with switching to a different hash function >> after N >> collisions, rather than "in the first place". The perturbation >> effectively does by >> shoving the high-order bits through the part of the hash that survives the >> mask.
> Except that it won't work or slow down every lookup of missing keys? > It's absolutely crucial that the lookup time is kept as fast as possible. It will only slow down missing keys that themselves hit more than N collisions. Or were you assuming that I meant to switch the whole table, rather than just that one key? I agree that wouldn't work. > You can't just change the hash algorithm in the middle of the work > without a speed impact on lookups. Right -- but there is nothing wrong with modifying the lookdict (and insert_clean) functions to do something different after the Nth collision than they did after the N-1th. -jJ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
