Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in B-tree library for Boost?
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-16 16:11:57
2010/9/16 Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga_at_[hidden]>:
> El 16/09/2010 3:08, Beman Dawes escribió:
>>> - Can this be adapted for in-memory use as well, with full non-POD
>> No current plans for that. Why wouldn't you just a standard library
>> associative container for that?
> I think it's about performance/node overhead (less rebalances, you allocate
> arrays and not individual nodes). But for memory, T-Trees are the way to go.
> They are used by many in-memory DBs.
> "In computer science a T-tree is a type of binary tree data structure that
> is used by main-memory databases, such as Datablitz, eXtremeDB, MySQL
> Cluster, Oracle TimesTen and KairosMobileLite"
The point is that for memory resident data, it is better to use a data
structure known to be optimal for memory resident data. A B-tree
doesn't really qualify.
For disk resident data, it is better to use a data structure known to
be optimal for disk resident data. The B-tree has no serious
competitors for general purpose disk resident associative containers.
That's why I'm trying to keep the focus of the B-tree library proposal
on disk resident cases, and not get sidetracked into memory resident
cases. Something else is probably better for most general in memory
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk