algorithm - Ternary Tree Vs Hash Table -
I should know that if one is better than one.
I got the answer in the answer to this question where someone said that Ternary trees are faster than the hash tables, I think that has worked hard to believe, so I have to do some research in it. decided.
The source of the trust seems to have taken a look at the algorithm which has been described as O (log n + k) where n is the number of words stored, and the length of the key is
It seems that this may be the only way faster, if you are searching for elements that are not already stored. One more thing that bothers me is that non-continuous crawling of a TRI will give you an opportunity to hit those pages that have been changed, but is it a big effect, only seen through the benchmark can go.
> Now I know that there are professionals and opposition for both of them, and if so, then I want to know what they are. Benchmarks are also useful.
I have found what you got from accessing with the Princeton link:
- Ternary Search Trees are 10% faster than some haveh tablets on search problems, they are sometimes slow - depending heavily on the machine to be used.
- TRT is a custom data structure that has been tuned by two great brains of computer science - both John Bentley and Robert Sadgwick have written, and they share their practical programming hash table with run-of- D-mill is considered.
- The included constants are important, because Hao Wui Lin is called.
- Overall, it depends on the problem you solve. Approximate evolution times and almost universal support for hash tables in many programming languages are often more important than ten percent improvement in running time.
Comments
Post a Comment