Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
question is more of like asking which data structure is suitable for implementing DNS server like functionality ? On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Gene gene.ress...@gmail.com wrote: This question has no answer. Every good student of computer science will know that you choose a data structure based on the _operations_ that must be performed on it: insert, lookup and what flavors of lookup, delete, etc.. So if an interviewer uses this question, he or she is probably trying to get you discuss this. So the right _response_ (not an answer) is What will you be _doing_ with these URLs? An example: Suppose you take Varun's approach and build a tree. Then it turns out the operation is Count the URLs for .png files. Well, the tree is no help here. You have to search the whole thing. On May 15, 11:50 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
@Rahul rope data structure wont be a good idea... Performance Operation Rope String(Array) index O(log n) O(1) split O(log n) O(1) concatenate O(log n) O(n) insert O(log n) O(n) delete O(log n) O(n) report O(log n) O(1) build O(n) O(n) the question says data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. but we would never be retrieving the partial url (a part of the url) On Friday, 18 May 2012 16:33:48 UTC+5:30, rahul r. srivastava wrote: rope data structure can be gud in such cases.. hashing may not be too efficient as many url wud almost be same as mentioned by prakash. trie is another option but i believe overhead in trie will be more... correct me if i am wrong. On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Ashish Goel ashg...@gmail.com wrote: Tiger Tree Hash Best Regards Ashish Goel Think positive and find fuel in failure +919985813081 +919966006652 On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Prem Krishna Chettri hprem...@gmail.com wrote: For the cases where Storing the Value is the only Concern and (Not the Retrieval efficiency), I would Suggest Something called DFA Subset minimization.. Google for it ... and after the final subset as said U can use something called DAWG for the most Most Optimal solution.. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Prakash D cegprak...@gmail.com wrote: We can still improve this trie idea.. say we have urls like www.google.com www.goodbye.com www.google.com/transliterate www.goodstrain.com/good we can subdivide everything under www.goo I mean we can store each character as a node in a trie and call it like a URL dictionary On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, omega9 tvssarma.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp:// www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/_MFEHEH3cSUJ. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
[algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
This question has no answer. Every good student of computer science will know that you choose a data structure based on the _operations_ that must be performed on it: insert, lookup and what flavors of lookup, delete, etc.. So if an interviewer uses this question, he or she is probably trying to get you discuss this. So the right _response_ (not an answer) is What will you be _doing_ with these URLs? An example: Suppose you take Varun's approach and build a tree. Then it turns out the operation is Count the URLs for .png files. Well, the tree is no help here. You have to search the whole thing. On May 15, 11:50 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
[algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
That's agreed Gene. Answer depends on context. On Saturday, 19 May 2012 22:46:06 UTC+5:30, Gene wrote: This question has no answer. Every good student of computer science will know that you choose a data structure based on the _operations_ that must be performed on it: insert, lookup and what flavors of lookup, delete, etc.. So if an interviewer uses this question, he or she is probably trying to get you discuss this. So the right _response_ (not an answer) is What will you be _doing_ with these URLs? An example: Suppose you take Varun's approach and build a tree. Then it turns out the operation is Count the URLs for .png files. Well, the tree is no help here. You have to search the whole thing. On May 15, 11:50 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/Pmzj6PeBWJ4J. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
Tiger Tree Hash Best Regards Ashish Goel Think positive and find fuel in failure +919985813081 +919966006652 On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Prem Krishna Chettri hprem...@gmail.comwrote: For the cases where Storing the Value is the only Concern and (Not the Retrieval efficiency), I would Suggest Something called DFA Subset minimization.. Google for it ... and after the final subset as said U can use something called DAWG for the most Most Optimal solution.. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Prakash D cegprak...@gmail.com wrote: We can still improve this trie idea.. say we have urls like www.google.com www.goodbye.com www.google.com/transliterate www.goodstrain.com/good we can subdivide everything under www.goo I mean we can store each character as a node in a trie and call it like a URL dictionary On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, omega9 tvssarma.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp:// www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
rope data structure can be gud in such cases.. hashing may not be too efficient as many url wud almost be same as mentioned by prakash. trie is another option but i believe overhead in trie will be more... correct me if i am wrong. On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Ashish Goel ashg...@gmail.com wrote: Tiger Tree Hash Best Regards Ashish Goel Think positive and find fuel in failure +919985813081 +919966006652 On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Prem Krishna Chettri hprem...@gmail.com wrote: For the cases where Storing the Value is the only Concern and (Not the Retrieval efficiency), I would Suggest Something called DFA Subset minimization.. Google for it ... and after the final subset as said U can use something called DAWG for the most Most Optimal solution.. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Prakash D cegprak...@gmail.com wrote: We can still improve this trie idea.. say we have urls like www.google.com www.goodbye.com www.google.com/transliterate www.goodstrain.com/good we can subdivide everything under www.goo I mean we can store each character as a node in a trie and call it like a URL dictionary On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, omega9 tvssarma.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp:// www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
We can still improve this trie idea.. say we have urls like www.google.com www.goodbye.com www.google.com/transliterate www.goodstrain.com/good we can subdivide everything under www.goo I mean we can store each character as a node in a trie and call it like a URL dictionary On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, omega9 tvssarma.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
For the cases where Storing the Value is the only Concern and (Not the Retrieval efficiency), I would Suggest Something called DFA Subset minimization.. Google for it ... and after the final subset as said U can use something called DAWG for the most Most Optimal solution.. On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Prakash D cegprak...@gmail.com wrote: We can still improve this trie idea.. say we have urls like www.google.com www.goodbye.com www.google.com/transliterate www.goodstrain.com/good we can subdivide everything under www.goo I mean we can store each character as a node in a trie and call it like a URL dictionary On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, omega9 tvssarma.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp:// www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
[algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
On May 16, 10:33 am, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.com wrote: @amit : here is the reason :- each url sayhttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urlshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.orghttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archiveshttp://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? I think the trie suggestion was good. Have each domain (with the protocol part) as a node and then have the subsequent directory locations as a hierarchy under it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
[algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
should be a tree based on domain in url and directory mentioned in url. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/idbhSUZ6TNIJ. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
i was thinking about using TRIE or patricia tree. hashing is another but it wont work if URLs are in millions is there any better data structure ? On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Varun tewari.va...@gmail.com wrote: should be a tree based on domain in url and directory mentioned in url. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/idbhSUZ6TNIJ. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
Why hashing won;t work for millions of URL. If you hash each URL in to a distinct 32 bit integer, you can map 2^32 URL which is around 4 billion. it should work. On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.comwrote: i was thinking about using TRIE or patricia tree. hashing is another but it wont work if URLs are in millions is there any better data structure ? On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Varun tewari.va...@gmail.com wrote: should be a tree based on domain in url and directory mentioned in url. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/idbhSUZ6TNIJ. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- Regards Amit Mittal -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
Re: [algogeeks] Re: storing URL's
@amit : here is the reason :- each url say http://www.geeksforgeeks.org you will hash following urls http://www.geeksforgeeks.org http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19248 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/ http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19221 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/19290 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1876 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/1763 http://www.geeksforgeeks.org; is the redundant part in each url . it would unnecessary m/m to save all URLs. ok now say file have 20 million urls . .now what would you do.?? On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Amit Mittal amit.mitt...@gmail.comwrote: Why hashing won;t work for millions of URL. If you hash each URL in to a distinct 32 bit integer, you can map 2^32 URL which is around 4 billion. it should work. On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, atul anand atul.87fri...@gmail.comwrote: i was thinking about using TRIE or patricia tree. hashing is another but it wont work if URLs are in millions is there any better data structure ? On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Varun tewari.va...@gmail.com wrote: should be a tree based on domain in url and directory mentioned in url. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. On Tuesday, 15 May 2012 21:20:55 UTC+5:30, atul007 wrote: Given a file which contain millions of URL's. which data structure would you use for storing these URL's . data structure used should store and fetch data in efficient manner. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/algogeeks/-/idbhSUZ6TNIJ. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- Regards Amit Mittal -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Algorithm Geeks group. To post to this group, send email to algogeeks@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to algogeeks+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
