allegro / allegro/bigcache

how about higher quality hash algorithm?

Abierto
#323 1 comentario 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub
discussion enhancement question
Lenguaje dominante
Go
Estrellas
8.2k
Forks
614
Merge medio
5 d 12 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
1

Descripción

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!

Guía de contribución

No hay ninguna guía de contribución indexada para este repositorio

Evaluación

Este issue todavía no se ha evaluado.

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.