Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
On a more general note: We don't use hashes as a means to
randomize our data. For us, they are simply containers with
an average O(1) insertion and lookup behavior. The APR interface
also allows for iterating that
Hyrum K Wright wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
...
On a more general note: We don't use hashes as a means to
randomize our data. For us, they are simply containers with
an average O(1) insertion and lookup behavior. The APR interface
also allows for iterating that
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>> Having a stable hash function sure doesn't seem like this would
>> account for that reduction. Can you please elaborate?
>
>
> Subversion up to and including 1.7 will serialize directories
> as string->string hashes in FSFS. wordpress.or
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>...
> On a more general note: We don't use hashes as a means to
> randomize our data. For us, they are simply containers with
> an average O(1) insertion and lookup behavior. The APR interface
> also allows for iterating that container - so
Am 20.05.2012 17:41, schrieb Justin Erenkrantz:
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
Directory deltification making wordpress.org
go from 400+GB to 10GB *is* a reason.
Without stable hashes, we would need special
code for hash deltification.
Having a stable hash function su
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
> Directory deltification making wordpress.org
> go from 400+GB to 10GB *is* a reason.
> Without stable hashes, we would need special
> code for hash deltification.
Having a stable hash function sure doesn't seem like this would
account for
Am 20.05.2012 12:14, schrieb Branko Čibej:
On 20.05.2012 03:33, Greg Stein wrote:
I thought the whole reason for variant results was to avoid O(N^2) attacks
against the hash table. You would be defeating that work.
I see no reason to use a stable hash. If outputs are supposed to stable,
then th
Greg Stein wrote:
I thought the whole reason for variant results was to avoid O(N^2)
attacks against the hash table. You would be defeating that work.
No. They (APR) did not solved the problem.
For instance, if all keys have the same length,
the new seed approach will simply rotate
the buck
On 20.05.2012 03:33, Greg Stein wrote:
> I thought the whole reason for variant results was to avoid O(N^2) attacks
> against the hash table. You would be defeating that work.
>
> I see no reason to use a stable hash. If outputs are supposed to stable,
> then the *presentation * layer should be sta
I thought the whole reason for variant results was to avoid O(N^2) attacks
against the hash table. You would be defeating that work.
I see no reason to use a stable hash. If outputs are supposed to stable,
then the *presentation * layer should be stabilizing. Not our core data
structure.
This is
10 matches
Mail list logo
