On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> but with the radix tree (please correct me if I'm wrong) the height will
> increase eventually, no matter what (so it won't be an effective O(1)
> like the hashtable provides in real life, not the worst case, the common
> case). With the hashtable the height won't increase instead.
No.
The radix tree is basically O(1), because the maximum depth of a 7-bit
radix tree is just 5. The index is only a 32-bit number.
We could, in fact, make all page caches use a fixed-depth tree, which is
clearly O(1). But the radix tree is slightly faster and tends to use less
memory under common loads, so..
Remember: you must NOT ignore the constant part of a "O(x)" equation.
Hashes tend to be effectively O(1) under most loads, but they have cache
costs, and they have scalability costs that a radix tree doesn't have.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:01:36 EST