Boost logo

Boost :

From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-17 03:37:34


On Jan 17, 2005, at 8:34 AM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> recently I've written a minimal perfect hash function generator, which
> generates very efficient hashing functions for arbitrary (reasonable
> large)
> key sets containing strictly positive integers to achieve a minimal and
> perfect mapping of these keys to hash values in the range [0..N),
> where N is
> the size of the key set (minimality requirement) and the hash values
> are
> unique (perfection requirement).
> [...]

> The initial overhead is tolerable, though, here are some timings on my
> machine - Pentium M, 1.6GHz, 1GByte:
>
> 20 keys: 0.005 [s], 200 keys: 0.03 [s], 2000 keys: 0.15 [s],
> 20000
> keys: 4.45[s]
>
> where the time is raising slightly more worse than linear (actually it
> has a
> linear and an exponential component, but the exponential component
> kicks in
> for larger key sets only), depending on the number of keys.
> The memory requirement for the MPH generator is raising linearily with
> the
> number of keys: roughly N/3 * sizeof(int), where N is the number of
> keys.

I'm very interested if this scales well for a larger number of keys, of
the order of 10^6 - 10^8 keys. I guess that for those sizes the scaling
will already be exponential. Can you tell us what the maximum number of
keys is that can be efficiently treated?

Matthias


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk