On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:12:21AM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
Without any real data on what UID distribution looks like in practice,
we're all speculating in a vacuum here.
Just for shits and giggles I ran this on a real password file with
about 350 users that's had lots of churn since it was
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:57:13 +
David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:12:21AM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
Without any real data on what UID distribution looks like in practice,
we're all speculating in a vacuum here.
Just for shits and giggles I ran
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 03:37:28PM +, Sad Clouds wrote:
Well, if hash table is heavily used for looking up keys, you can reduce
the number of collisions even further. The trick is to use different
hash functions, which are very fast to compute:
This is just one (bad) version of
Dear lists,
I have ported various modifications from OpenBSD and FreeBSD to bnx(4)
and brgphy(4) (see attach).
The modifications in question add BCM5709S support (SerDes 1000baseSX
FDX), and endianness hardware management (avoid using htole32()).
I thank anyone in advance that could have access
