Concurrent Robin Hood Hashing — mentioned by te

Sat, 02 May 2020 18:18:23 GMT

I'd probably look at this one as well: https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.04339

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Concurrent Robin Hood Hashing — mentioned by NovaX

Sun, 06 Jan 2019 18:32:06 GMT

Thanks for the reply. I wasn't trying to critique your work, but when something seems wrong it's worth trying to understand why. That's either a mistake in the project or my understanding. Java and C++ concurrent maps scale reads quite well, both in practice and in research. I was comparing only in-memory read-only map lookups, not those that persist like FASTER and MassTree. I should note though that decade or older hardware will have lower multi-threaded throughput by using many slow cores (Azul, Sparc), so those raw numbers are not comparable to today's x86 machines. In my experience when…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Concurrent Robin Hood Hashing · HackerPapers discussions

Concurrent Robin Hood Hashing — mentioned by te

Concurrent Robin Hood Hashing — mentioned by NovaX