On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 9:59 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote: > > I didn't understand what you meant by the above. Did you wack around > fast-hash, or who did?
I turned it into an init/accum/final style (shouldn't affect the result), and took out the input length from the calculation (will affect the result and I'll look into putting it back some other way). > Who switched mixing/final functions; compared to > what? Sorry for the confusion. I didn't change those, I was speaking hypothetically. > In any case, +1 on the implementation you had in the patch at a quick > glance. > > Let's also replace the partial murmurhash implementations we have in > hashfn.h with this. It's a very similar algorithm, and we don't need two. Thanks for taking a look! For small fixed-sized values, it's common to special-case a murmur-style finalizer regardless of the algorithm for longer inputs. Syscache combines multiple hashes for multiple keys, so it's probably worth it to avoid adding cycles there.
