From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <aber@semihalf.com>
Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com
 [209.85.215.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D9158CE
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  1 Sep 2017 18:15:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id z12so2502305lfd.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 09:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=bPdxGXiyKnNS3h+AnU6uHPqF7q7a61g0WClfruZyJCg=;
 b=qJtE0oLxWtmigkCg7MDtIS+90AAQucMRXyorBsTw89uISkdqj47/JUIvsTi9+n+gqK
 Xv5SEhi4Z8OTbAMWvrldzS9ebZpbMViKvHIBpjYDW/cVTphmX8Nq5y1r+RRM9s08/tDj
 QvouK283hv1qdGehoV8otV+Nzt+EdtNf6Xm5nkkQurQG0jSfI0T+uQLhH0Jhoj2YWKjg
 qHS65c8YIL1wejeExQ9U2qxgFvlqK4ZGZG5cgENaNFSWobeSAh1rE6cznTt0pABDLHPZ
 FBkeHARXJXzO6oPsfO5c9jI6hrHJv6XJe8v1Qwt07UsLukGxI2HhUmcCDJcL3b91Mzu9
 sZWg==
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:cc;
 bh=bPdxGXiyKnNS3h+AnU6uHPqF7q7a61g0WClfruZyJCg=;
 b=jgZEJpuNIKFQmueHnGXOPGean2Bl+g0FhSEOUEy8pzL3gltA6348ii62AHyFfksAL8
 srnf/oYqHo6Mg4oMgPaCFwBQZ2S+PbOpFC5wgPBhshZNiA7lNo40L7IU8sJfZzQB2XFj
 E2fCD0BAKW2skb9kGH0AWF07oraeE5I+1/UIdJZJWtKi/VTUR5PtCncSeLjLLBfZo27O
 SXsE4lWxS8xrecRGoLzuk7zqJPBps2LchUKANANWLLcXLFnUzndwyB4sKWgB1ZocnE0F
 pykA26qC/I5U3/g3KiNjqWgccOwBFr0ddsWxjc9zRQT+79Km0IlwdHvUoCqkgs+tuF7d
 qSpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjnh/ncA5S9z6zN3+wG7oUcos3AWbNmiAf3higUjDJmKtVnpKhp
 8h5PCYJ4L8PnWhTQgbo2sPvb2HYHwikE
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb6FDU1hoWpE/Ja16FWItMIhCFzVWCjGTM/WLiHocOgYfTTsFTGPvYymoP+2LIeT2Gg8SDIGX5kLpiYVL1KuCcs=
X-Received: by 10.46.20.88 with SMTP id 24mr872296lju.161.1504282539751; Fri,
 01 Sep 2017 09:15:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.179.0.8 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 09:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andriy Berestovskyy <aber@semihalf.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 18:15:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOysbxpQXCb2Fy6_p0-JZrxbB8pd=-N=A6LeLt4-5BQQrBvqSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Evgeny Agronsky <evgeny.agronsky@gmail.com>
Cc: DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Why cuckoo based hashing in DPDK library?
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2017 16:15:40 -0000

Hey Evgeny,
Please see inline.

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Evgeny Agronsky
<evgeny.agronsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm basicly asking because of it's poor performance under high

Well, it is not the academic cuckoo hash implementation, so the
performance is not that bad and it also utilizes cache ;)

Please have a look at this paper for more details:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dongz/papers/cuckooswitch.pdf

> with universal hash functions? I'm simply curious, maybe you have some sort
> of benchmarks.

Once someone implement a Hopscotch for DPDK, we could run some benchmarks... ;)
But sure, it would be great to have a faster hash implementation,
since DPDK is all about performance...

Andriy