From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: hashed waitqueues
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:42:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020116094226.A760@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020104094049.A10326@holomorphy.com> <E16MeqE-0001Ea-00@starship.berlin> <20020104173923.B10391@holomorphy.com> <20020116142140.A31993@kushida.apsleyroad.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020116142140.A31993@kushida.apsleyroad.org>; from lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk on Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 02:21:41PM +0000
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 02:21:41PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Looking up "good hash function" on Google leads to these notable pages:
[various URL's]
> The last one is interesting because it mentions the golden prime
> multiplier function, and suggests good non-multipler functions instead.
> (Justification: the multiplier function doesn't distribute bits evenly).
Excellent! I can always use more of these to test.
It seems odd that they don't like Fibonacci hashing, it appears to pass
various chi^2 tests on bucket distribution. And operator-sparse Fibonacci
hashing primes appear to pass it as well, at least once 10 terms of the
continued fraction match (operator-sparse Fibonacci hashing primes means
that the multiplication can be done with shifts and adds or subtracts).
Regardless, various arches want non-multiplicative hash functions and
they'll be getting them. These hash functions will certainly prove
useful in getting a broader base to test against. I don't care to have
a "pet" hash function, only one that is good as possible.
Thanks,
Bill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-16 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-04 17:40 hashed waitqueues William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-04 21:47 ` Momchil Velikov
2002-01-04 23:07 ` Andrew Morton
2002-01-04 23:21 ` Andrew Morton
2002-01-04 23:48 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-05 0:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-01-05 1:39 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-05 2:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-01-05 5:06 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-08 18:20 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-08 18:27 ` William Lee Irwin III
[not found] ` <523d1gu1ni.fsf@love-boat.topspincom.com>
2002-01-08 18:44 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-08 19:20 ` Hugh Dickins
2002-01-08 20:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-01-16 14:21 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-01-16 17:42 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2002-01-18 0:34 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-01-06 21:09 ` Rik van Riel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-01-04 21:17 Ed Tomlinson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020116094226.A760@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox