Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not seeing any benchmarks: since they tout speed as a major selling point, that surprises me.

Edit: For instance, the blog post mentions being inspirsed by MurmurHash, which touts its performance on its site along with benchmarks (http://sites.google.com/site/murmurhash/):

    OneAtATime - 354.163715 mb/sec
    FNV - 443.668038 mb/sec
    SuperFastHash - 985.335173 mb/sec
    lookup3 - 988.080652 mb/sec
    MurmurHash 1.0 - 1363.293480 mb/sec
    MurmurHash 2.0 - 2056.885653 mb/sec
In fact, it looks like the author of MurmurHash also developed a test suite for hash functions which includes performance testing: http://code.google.com/p/smhasher/wiki/SMHasher


looking at the code, they've optimized for speed. And they also said -

> We decided to optimize for speed rather than simplicity and even included special cases for short inputs.


Right, I understand that. I'm just surprised that they aren't showing off benchmarks or statistics to quantify the performance gains they're seeing.


and i'm not seeing any definition of what the hash is, or why it should be any good, apart from the code...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: