Re: [boost] [multi_index] benchmarking

From: Darren Cook (darren_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-30 20:25:45

>>Surprisingly google::dense_hash_set often outperforms all other 
>>containers in both speed and memory usage.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Hello Maxim, gd_hash is expected to be faster than other hash
> containers, but in general it occupies more memory --only that
> your test is particularly favorable to gd_hash, ...

Very interesting results (and explanation). Thanks.

Recently if I'm writing in C++ instead of a quick-and-easy scripting
language it is often because I need a lookup table (i.e. a hash-map)
with millions of entries and performance starts to really matter, so
seeing where each solution is better/worse is very useful to me.

Darren