From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <users-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92642A04BA
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri,  2 Oct 2020 09:06:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8041D5A6;
	Fri,  2 Oct 2020 09:05:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-lj1-f179.google.com (mail-lj1-f179.google.com
 [209.85.208.179]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527881DE4A
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:28:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-lj1-f179.google.com with SMTP id n25so2932754ljj.4
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=fk0q6wkIZ34lMdij3zp5C3kdx1CJoj6gFlzpAzJEOAM=;
 b=Ahcq0f1xRZoR4fZvngKhIQyfcxRhlFu/EU2m35QtkEqlyEXONZm8SKwp55UCQ5KxGx
 F4AfAE97BGVgb9+Y+Rn4qAjtQBvnMGKKGQzsFhQf3BfuI7SEqr0dn13ugyPz9U6qK6MQ
 h7tuXe2T4+zxZlcvQPvPWukdBstmNIR1BKZzaLHMn7e+d8EZL17z6/eZRdrDHgov9ixX
 Y9e3PI0gpRZOXm9fOO2a+SNdCFHM6wL7WmSRmARsyj68UgRO/mKR2LJj3/7qGm169w2J
 kUIIDhZYBHQ7035JXpRV2Xy/XcIfKYbOv87hL+3axjDdFWccdjtI+u5hy+UapfVebkUI
 TyKg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=fk0q6wkIZ34lMdij3zp5C3kdx1CJoj6gFlzpAzJEOAM=;
 b=AQFkOTblbYcAvPDKBDsznBEUckDVnvWmks9/9oSbO7WtRArlRp4ZGPVqk+NkKJJyNd
 1kizaqRDHuzDD+e0vN+3BqYshBFcIdamTJpMpsncwdvXkBVtSMiwf4xk+9e90wqOC3bP
 y8SHJW5IRmrohuAnuTtPl/NqMy25EMh3j3jNn5SKjqrKaUgCL076L8zr3bHfeK3qpPOB
 hXJF7ybVgNZoNTVTlO1vcmvgNXzaod5GKQC90s5bXrU4yvlBw4HLeXEzLyUrTIK/uVOd
 zOgRg/FarpbAls9Y7Zqc2WYnzAHM0clxZNIbQqNVFdzvvI71dut0RFg+d2ivWVkwkQ25
 0j4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531qOcqXWzq3lORk/eE4Ru32QHikel0POLb/wVlQwfRSdKptNJis
 udVsEOS2n4EOKafa3DiA7f5rzVeU99Leg/sz0Ucr92p7k9drPe7N
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw8cCgZj6Ur/h0Ie4tln2a4TFqyhfniKF4wxiu8q53/X8SAS+/Ahd36ZojL3f5S1yUlsq+Roet7b8hQWqUadmI=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a41b:: with SMTP id p27mr10902ljn.75.1600957721698;
 Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: rahul s <rs1041447@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 19:58:23 +0530
Message-ID: <CACq9gPxvKPR_-uRZRUZvZnE0kU767p+wd4U4oWMJRt5Vpxo2ww@mail.gmail.com>
To: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 09:05:54 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-users] dpdk hash performance
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "users" <users-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi,

I am using rte_hash library with parameters as 2k entries with rte_jhash
function with key len as 8 bytes.And key I am using here is just 64 bit
unsigned integer .

Similarly  I am looking on c ++ std:unorder_map<unsignet int 64,struct
*>map  with similar entries .
I am just doing lookup  with 20 keys  aginsts 2k entries and the  through
put  performance dip around <=4gbps using rte_hash when compared to
std:unorder_map in 100G line  .Is there any way to scale the performance
using the rte_hash library...

with regards,
Rahul