Thanks for the warning anyway! Btw... since MurmurHash is beginning to look like a critical path on some modeling, I think I am going to go back and port the 32 bit version.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Thomas Sauzedde (JIRA) <[email protected]>wrote: > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-503?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel] > > Thomas Sauzedde resolved MAHOUT-503. > ------------------------------------ > > Resolution: Invalid > > Didn't notice the comment neither the diff between the code base and the > original port :-( > Sorry, but now I know you was aware of a potential issue ;-) > > Thanks > > > > Bad murmur hash implementation ?!? > > ---------------------------------- > > > > Key: MAHOUT-503 > > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-503 > > Project: Mahout > > Issue Type: Improvement > > Components: Classification > > Reporter: Thomas Sauzedde > > > > It looks like the murmur hash implementation is coming from the original > C to Java port (see http://www.getopt.org/murmur/MurmurHash.java) > > According to http://dmy999.com/article/50/murmurhash-2-java-port, (not > verified myself), this port doesn't produce the same results than the > original C code. > > -- > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > - > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. > >
