allegro / allegro/bigcache

how about higher quality hash algorithm?

Offen
#323 1 Kommentar 0 Reaktionen 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen
discussion enhancement question
Vorherrschende Sprache
Go
Sterne
8.2k
Forks
614
Ø Merge
5 T. 12 Std.
Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
1

Beschreibung

Although hash algorithm is not the Bottleneck of bigcache, the [smhasher](https://github.com/rurban/smhasher)(the project of hash function quality and speed tests) show that FVNa has poor quality while other hash func has higher.

Should we evaluate the default hash func of bigcache again? After [the question and answer of hash](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3665247/fastest-hash-for-non-cryptographic-uses), lots of new hash functions come out, such as xxhash, wyhash, menhash, which have higher quality.

Due to some hash functions use hardware instructions provided by the CPU to accelerate (AVX2, SSE), we can use different hash func in different Platform, such as:
1. FVNa default
2. xxhash in amd

By the way, why bigcache has no dependence? Should only no dependence PR can be approve?

Look forward to your reply!

Beitragsleitfaden

Für dieses Repository ist kein Beitragsleitfaden indexiert

Bewertung

Dieses Issue wurde noch nicht bewertet.

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.