Some thoughts: 1. How big and complex is a MyClass? You're inserting a copy. Could that be the source of the overhead? 2. The performance of a sort of N items is no better than an ordered insert of N items. If MyClass does not have move operators, and is large, performance of the sort will be worse. On 27 April 2017 at 11:38, miticodonati--- via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

I have the following structure:

typedef boost::multi_index_container< MyClass, boost::multi_index::indexed_by< boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::member<MyClass, int, &MyClass::label>>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::member<MyClass, double, &MyClass::dist>> >

...

MyClassSet;

If i populate it in a loop:

MyClassSet all: for (int y = 0; y < input.rows; ++y) { MyClass c; // .... all.insert(c); }

the insertion time is quite slow. It probably need to continuously re-order the underlying implementation. Anyway i would expect that populating it with a single call it would be faster (e.g. sorting the whole set only at the end). Example:

std::vector<MyClass> vec; // ... MyClassSet all(vec.begin(), vec.end());

BUT... the times are almost equal.

My question is: is this intended behaviour? Is there a faster way to mass populate the container (e.g. not enforcing the invariants/orderings at each 'insert')?

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/ mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost