On Mar 17, 2009, at 8:19 AM, Richard Boyes wrote: > The headline results were that the Judy array used ~1/4 - 1/3rd of > the memory of my hash table (which had a load of about 50%), while > there was a slight improvement in the speed (average hash run time > = x, average judy run time = y), which was statistically > significant in a t-test.
Sweet! Have you written down more details that others can read? I don't have experience building Judy on Windows, but I have the following comments: 1. I don't think it should matter which compiler was used to generate JudyLTablesGen (but I'm not sure). 2. Why not just use gcc everywhere instead of the Microsoft compiler? :-) Regards, Zooko --- Tahoe, the Least-Authority Filesystem -- http://allmydata.org store your data: $10/month -- http://allmydata.com/?tracking=zsig ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging. Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com _______________________________________________ Judy-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/judy-devel
