Re: [RFC] Use a 16-tree instead of a 256-tree for storing notes
- From
Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
- Date
- Aug 26, 2009, 12:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200908261456.55906.johan@herland.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <81b0412b0908260505m233d9a5cmefdd81e1ef51a299@mail.gmail.com>
On Wednesday 26 August 2009, Alex Riesen wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:31, Johan Herland<johan@herland.net> wrote: > > The 256-tree structure is considerably faster than storing all > > entries in a > > This part is confusing. Was 256-tree better (as in "faster") then?
256-tree is faster than the everything-in-hash_map draft. 16-tree is slightly faster than 256-tree
256-tree uses more memory (in the worst case) that the everything-in-hash-map draft. 16-tree uses less memory than both.
Makes sense?
...Johan
-- Johan Herland, <johan@herland.net> www.herland.net