Ahh, I think I see it now. So the idea would be to store all possible pairs (e.g. 2.5 billion) in a hash, then delete each pair after its been selected? That would be pretty memory intensive at the beginning, but peter-out by the end.
Given the testing density (100 million out of 2450 million = ~4%) perhaps the slowdown at the end won't be too considerable -- only one duplicate hit for every 24 new ones.
In reply to Re^4: Benchmarking A DB-Intensive Script
by bernanke01
in thread Benchmarking A DB-Intensive Script
by bernanke01
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |