>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (k) wrote: >k> Hello, >k> I am using some very large dictionaries with keys that are long strings >k> (urls). For a large dictionary these keys start to take up a >k> significant amount of memory. I do not need access to these keys -- I >k> only need to be able to retrieve the value associated with a certain >k> key, so I do not want to have the keys stored in memory. Could I just >k> hash() the url strings first and use the resulting integer as the key? >k> I think what I'm after here is more like a tradition hash table. If I >k> do it this way am I going to get the memory savings I am after? Will >k> the hash function always generate unique keys? Also, would the same >k> technique work for a set?
Maybe a Berkeley DB hash file would be a good alternative. It can contain all your key,value pairs but will only keep a small amount in memory. -- Piet van Oostrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
