Re: LuaJIT benchmark
- From: Fredrik Widlund <fredrik.widlund@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 18:40:46 +0100
b) a high temporal correlation
...between consecutive requests I assume you mean. If this is not about
arguing that you can't test hash tables with integers and if you advice on
how to construct a suitable set of lookup keys, that in your mind is
typical, I will redo the benchmark with it as a test case. I will use a hit
ratio of your liking as well.
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Mike Pall <mike-1403@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Fredrik Widlund wrote:
> > Benchmark of LuaJIT tables vs Java HashMap vs C++ unordered_map
>
> Sigh, the Lua program doesn't even use local variables in the
> inner loop ...
>
> Oh, and before anyone thinks this really measures hash table
> implementation quality: it's just measuring the overhead of branch
> mispredictions and cache misses for an atypical use case of hash
> tables.
>
> [Typical hash table accesses use a) string keys with b) a high
> temporal correlation and c) they usually have a high hit-rate or a
> high miss-rate, but it's rarely 50/50.]
>
> --Mike
>
>
Other related posts:
