In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > I am afraid I have missed most earlier messages in this thread. > However, let me remark that the problem of assigning a > file descriptor is the one that is usually described by > "priority queue". The version of Peter van Emde Boas takes > time O(loglog N) for both open() and close(). > Of course this is not meant to suggest that we use it. > Fascinating ! But how is this possible ? What stops me from using this algorithm from entering N values and extracting them again in order and so end up with a O(N*log log N) sorting algorithm ? (which would be better than log N! ~ N*logN) (at least the web pages I found about this seem to suggest you can use this on any set with a full order relation) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? James Sutherland
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Anton Blanchard
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Sasi Peter
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Anton Blanchard
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? David S. Miller
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Anton Blanchard
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Pavel Machek
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? jamal
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Pavel Machek
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Andries . Brouwer
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Ton Hospel
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Steve VanDevender
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Ton Hospel
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Ben Mansell
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Linus Torvalds
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Olivier Galibert
- RE: Is sendfile all that sexy? LA Walsh
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Rogier Wolff
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Andreas Dilger
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Russell Leighton
- Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? Larry McVoy