1
Fork 0

Pre-release comments.

main
Davi de Castro Reis 2012-06-03 04:17:14 -03:00
parent 0d7a176458
commit cc42ab3b74
4 changed files with 41 additions and 13 deletions

14
README
View File

@ -84,6 +84,18 @@ The CMPH Library encapsulates the newest and more efficient algorithms in an eas
----------------------------------------
News for version 2.0
====================
Cleaned up most warnings for the c code.
Experimental C++ interface (--enable-cxxmph) implementing the BDZ algorithm in
a convenient SimpleMPHIndex interface, which serves as the basis
for drop-in replacements for std::unordered_map, sparsehash::sparse_hash_map
and sparsehash::dense_hash_map. Faster lookup time at the expense of insertion
time. See cxxmpph/mph_map.h and cxxmph/mph_index.h for details.
News for version 1.1
====================
@ -310,5 +322,5 @@ Fabiano Cupertino Botelho (fc_botelho@users.sourceforge.net)
Nivio Ziviani (nivio@dcc.ufmg.br)
Last Updated: Fri Jun 1 19:04:40 2012
Last Updated: Sun Jun 3 04:09:55 2012

View File

@ -88,6 +88,16 @@ The CMPH Library encapsulates the newest and more efficient algorithms in an eas
----------------------------------------
==News for version 2.0==
Cleaned up most warnings for the c code.
Experimental C++ interface (--enable-cxxmph) implementing the BDZ algorithm in
a convenient interface, which serves as the basis
for drop-in replacements for std::unordered_map, sparsehash::sparse_hash_map
and sparsehash::dense_hash_map. Potentially faster lookup time at the expense
of insertion time. See cxxmpph/mph_map.h and cxxmph/mph_index.h for details.
==News for version 1.1==
Fixed a bug in the chd_pc algorithm and reorganized tests.

View File

@ -10,16 +10,12 @@
// This is a pretty uncommon data structure, and if you application has a real
// use case for it, chances are that it is a real win. If all you are doing is
// a straightforward implementation of an in-memory associative mapping data
// structure, then it will probably be slower, since that the
// evaluation of index() is typically slower than the total cost of running a
// traditional hash function over a key and doing 2-3 conflict resolutions on
// 100byte-ish strings. If you still want to do, take a look at mph_map.h
// structure, then it will probably be slower. Take a look at mph_map.h
// instead.
//
// Thesis presenting this and similar algorithms:
// http://homepages.dcc.ufmg.br/~fbotelho/en/talks/thesis2008/thesis.pdf
//
//
// Notes:
//
// Most users can use the SimpleMPHIndex wrapper instead of the MPHIndex which

View File

@ -3,15 +3,25 @@
// Implementation of the unordered associative mapping interface using a
// minimal perfect hash function.
//
// This class not necessarily faster than unordered_map (or ext/hash_map).
// Benchmark your code before using it. If you do not call rehash() before
// starting your reads, it will be very likely slower than unordered_map.
// Since these are header-mostly libraries, make sure you compile your code
// with -DNDEBUG and -O3. The code requires a modern C++11 compiler.
//
// The container comes in 3 flavors, all in the cxxmph namespace and drop-in
// replacement for the popular classes with the same names.
// * dense_hash_map
// -> fast, uses more memory, 2.93 bits per bucket, ~50% occupation
// * unordered_map (aliases: hash_map, mph_map)
// -> middle ground, uses 2.93 bits per bucket, ~81% occupation
// * sparse_hash_map -> slower, uses 3.6 bits per bucket
// -> less fast, uses 3.6 bits per bucket, 100% occupation
//
// Those classes are not necessarily faster than their existing counterparts.
// Benchmark your code before using it. The larger the key, the larger the
// number of elements inserted, and the bigger the number of failed searches,
// the more likely those classes will outperform existing code.
//
// For large sets of urls (>100k), which are a somewhat expensive to compare, I
// found this class to be about 10%-30% faster than unordered_map.
//
// The space overhead of this map is 2.6 bits per bucket and it achieves 100%
// occupation with a rehash call.
// found those class to be about 10%-50% faster than unordered_map.
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>