Re^5: Hash Search is VERY slow

> The win in using pack over plain is not the .3% gain in memory size, but the ease of sorting.

I'm confused ... when do I need to sort hash keys?

And why is it "easier" to sort the packed version of "023.156" ? Do you mean faster?

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

Comment on Re^5: Hash Search is VERY slow Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Hash Search is VERY slow by Tux (Canon) on Sep 30, 2021 at 13:07 UTC
I sort hash keys all the time. And IP sorting is easy when you include leading zeroes as you just did, but most IP's I see in log files are without leading zeroes, so ordering them would result in `1.2.3.4 10.2.3.4 104.2.3.4 11.2.3.4 2.2.3.4 23.2.108.4 23.2.3.4 23.2.30.4 23.2.4.4` [download] and IMHO that sucks. Using packed keys sorting is always correct. If it is faster? No idea, Icould bench that, but I expect it to be marginal Side note: I always sort hash keys in tests, as order is randow Enjoy, Have FUN! H.Merijn	[reply] [d/l]
Re^7: Hash Search is VERY slow by LanX (Saint) on Sep 30, 2021 at 14:30 UTC
OK thanks, I see. was confused b/c the thread was about "slowness". Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]
Re^6: Hash Search is VERY slow by soonix (Chancellor) on Sep 30, 2021 at 13:02 UTC
Hex octets have always the same length. Writing them in decimal, one often wants padding, which can inadvertently lead to octal notation.	[reply]