allegro / allegro/bigcache

how about higher quality hash algorithm?

Ouverte
#323 1 commentaire 0 réactions 0 personnes assignées Voir sur GitHub
discussion enhancement question
Langage dominant
Go
Étoiles
8.2k
Forks
614
Merge moyen
5 j 12 h
PR mergées (30 j)
1

Description

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!

Guide de contribution

Aucun guide de contribution indexé pour ce dépôt

Évaluation

Cette issue n'a pas encore été évaluée.

Recevez les nouvelles issues par e-mail

Un résumé court des issues GitHub adaptées aux débutants.