El 06/01/2010 2:18, Bob Walters escribió:
On Jan 5, 2010, at 9:08 AM, Ion Gazta?aga<igaztanaga@gmail.com> wrote:
I think most in-memory databases use T-trees as main containers. I plan to add them as Interprocess containers for late 2010, but of course, that will depend on my free time. With those containers, we could speed up searches and waste less space.
Would the interface remain identical to map? The current 'trans_map' can be revised slightly so that it would be a transactional wrapper for any map implementation, leaving the internals of storage to the implementation. Taking advantage of a T-tree variant would then be very easy to accomplish.
Yes, it would be identical, except that you have different iterator validation guarantees, because a T-tree instead of nodes has arrays and that requires some copying (or moving) when rebalancing. So iterators might be invalidated when inserting or erasing. Is that a problem for your library. Best, Ion