31 May
2006
31 May
'06
12:25 a.m.
Surprisingly google::dense_hash_set often outperforms all other containers in both speed and memory usage.
[...]
Hello Maxim, gd_hash is expected to be faster than other hash containers, but in general it occupies more memory --only that your test is particularly favorable to gd_hash, ...
Very interesting results (and explanation). Thanks. Recently if I'm writing in C++ instead of a quick-and-easy scripting language it is often because I need a lookup table (i.e. a hash-map) with millions of entries and performance starts to really matter, so seeing where each solution is better/worse is very useful to me. Darren