On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Anders Broman <[email protected]> wrote: > >In my benchmarks it is measurably slower than GHashTable, but not > excessively > > >so. Given the additional security it provides this seems like a > reasonable > > >trade-off (and it is still faster than a wmem_tree). > > > > Any idea what makes I slower? The hash algorithm? > http://www.azillionmonkeys.com/qed/hash.html
Effectively. It has to do a fair bit more work per hash in order to properly mix in the randomness and prevent algorithmic complexity attacks. The implementation is simpler, so there are probably other areas where glib is slightly more optimized, but I expect the stronger hash is most of it. Evan ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
