Re: [Boost-users] [multi index].[composite key] Index creation atrun-time.
One final suggestion :) regarding the choice of index_container in terms of performance, memory requirements, serialization support and insert/lookup opreations considering that std::vector<const std::string> will be
----- Mensaje original ----- De: Prashant Thakre <prashant.thakre@gmail.com> Fecha: Jueves, Junio 8, 2006 8:46 pm Asunto: Re: [Boost-users] [multi index].[composite key] Index creation atrun-time. the
basis for this container : 1.Composite keys and hashed indices. 2.Hashed indices.
Excuse me, but I don't get what your suggestion or question is. Would you mind rephrasing or elaborating some more? Thank you.
Thanks a lot for clarifying all the doubts.
It is a pleasure.
-- regards, Prashant Thakre
Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Excuse me, but I don't get what your suggestion or question is. Would you mind rephrasing or elaborating some more? Thank you. Wrong choice of words I would say, wasn't trying to suggest anything :( I actually wanted to know the type of container best suited in terms of
Hi, performance, insert/lookup operations and memory requirements from the two listed below (keys are known only at run-time): 1. Composite keys and hashed indices. 2. Hashed indices. Regards, Prashant Thakre JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z <joaquin <at> tid.es> writes:
----- Mensaje original ----- De: Prashant Thakre <prashant.thakre <at> gmail.com> Fecha: Jueves, Junio 8, 2006 8:46 pm Asunto: Re: [Boost-users] [multi index].[composite key] Index creation atrun-time.
One final suggestion :) regarding the choice of index_container in terms of performance, memory requirements, serialization support and insert/lookup opreations considering that std::vector<const std::string> will be the basis for this container : 1.Composite keys and hashed indices. 2.Hashed indices.
Excuse me, but I don't get what your suggestion or question is. Would you mind rephrasing or elaborating some more? Thank you.
Prashant Thakre ha escrito:
Excuse me, but I don't get what your suggestion or question is. Would you mind rephrasing or elaborating some more? Thank you. Wrong choice of words I would say, wasn't trying to suggest anything :( I actually wanted to know the type of container best suited in terms of
Hi, performance, insert/lookup operations and memory requirements from the two listed below (keys are known only at run-time): 1. Composite keys and hashed indices. 2. Hashed indices.
I don't think composite keys introduce any run-time penalty, so both scenarios should be pretty much equivalent. On the other hand, scenario #2 is the only one we have more or less developed in this thread, so I'd say go for it.
Regards, Prashant Thakre
Thanks for using Boost.MultiIndex, Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin <at> tid.es> writes:
I don't think composite keys introduce any run-time penalty, so both scenarios should be pretty much equivalent. On the other hand, scenario #2 is the only one we have more or less developed in this thread, so I'd say go for it.
Thanks for using Boost.MultiIndex,
Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Hi, Well then scenario #2 it is, since I don't really require partial search. Thanks a lot for this amazing library [Boost.MultiIndex]. Regards, Prashant Thakre
participants (3)
-
JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z -
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz
-
Prashant Thakre