<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: C++ Set Performance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/</link>
	<description>The words and ideas of Tino Didriksen</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:51:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tino Didriksen</title>
		<link>http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/#comment-11722</link>
		<dc:creator>Tino Didriksen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:05:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinodidriksen.com/?p=240#comment-11722</guid>
		<description>Very likely because I am using key type uint32_t.

sparse_hash_set allocates each element separately, where dense_hash_set allocates contiguous chunks to be doled out later. For type uint32_t that is much more efficient, but I would expect that for a larger type it would be drastically inverted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very likely because I am using key type uint32_t.</p>
<p>sparse_hash_set allocates each element separately, where dense_hash_set allocates contiguous chunks to be doled out later. For type uint32_t that is much more efficient, but I would expect that for a larger type it would be drastically inverted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ethan Schreiber</title>
		<link>http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/#comment-11720</link>
		<dc:creator>Ethan Schreiber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:55:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinodidriksen.com/?p=240#comment-11720</guid>
		<description>Why do you suppose google::dense_hash_set used less memory than google::sparse_hash_set	?  According to Google, this is opposite of what one should expect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do you suppose google::dense_hash_set used less memory than google::sparse_hash_set	?  According to Google, this is opposite of what one should expect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tino Didriksen</title>
		<link>http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/#comment-10093</link>
		<dc:creator>Tino Didriksen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinodidriksen.com/?p=240#comment-10093</guid>
		<description>Yep. The numbers denote time/ticks and memory used performing the action, so smaller is better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep. The numbers denote time/ticks and memory used performing the action, so smaller is better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mahbub Murshed</title>
		<link>http://tinodidriksen.com/2010/04/02/cpp-set-performance/#comment-10092</link>
		<dc:creator>Mahbub Murshed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinodidriksen.com/?p=240#comment-10092</guid>
		<description>The numbers are: the smaller the better. Right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The numbers are: the smaller the better. Right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

