![]() |
|
more useful options | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
If anything, you should probably switch to a structure like
That way you still get full hash lookup performance on the entire (two dimensional) key. And you avoid creating whole legions of hashes. That should pretty much fix 90% of your problem. And such a flat hash is trivial to tie to a DBM file. Don't knock DBMs without benchmarking them. DBM files are specifically laid out to allow for rapid retrieval - paging just indiscriminately swaps out whatever seems least necessary, including other parts of the system besides the data. Drawing any conclusions about one based on the other borders on ridiculous. Makeshifts last the longest. In reply to Re^3: A memory efficient hash, trading off speed - does it already exist?
by Aristotle
|
|