Fibonacci Hashing revisted

[Alexander Frink]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> suggesting an improvement of a factor 260 or 270.  At the same time,
> the timings got only very marginally better, indicating that there is
> nothing to be gained by better hash functions, even perfect
> collision-free ones (if they would exist), since deep traversals caused by
> equal objects outweight deep traversals caused by hash collisions of
> different objects.

Did you also measure the ratio between comparisons which turn out
to be equal to those turning out to be different?

But there will still a business case for better hash functions,
if you plan to revive the hash-based expairseq-combining.

Alex

-- 
Alexander Frink                      E-Mail: Alexander.Frink at Uni-Mainz.DE
Institut fuer Physik                 Phone:  +49-6131-3923391
Johannes-Gutenberg-Universitaet
D-55099 Mainz, Germany