On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 18:33, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Can you play a bit with the hash table sizes? Perhaps double the
>> dcache hash and half the inode hash ?
>> I suspect it really just needs a better hash function. I'll cook
>> something up based on FNV hash.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 11:21:38AM +0000, Gianni Tedesco wrote:
> Didn't wli do some work in this area? I seem to recall him recommending
> FNV1a for dcache...
The work I did here was inconclusive but _suggested_ (non-rigorously)
that FNV was merely more expensive with little benefit for the most
straightforward hash function replacement strategy.
More intelligent mixing strategies for parent + child names etc. may
reveal some use for it yet, but I have zero results in that area.
There is much room for experimentation AFAICT.
-- wli
-
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 : Fri Feb 28 2003 - 22:00:41 EST