Atomic ets

Robert Virding <>
Tue Dec 20 22:14:44 CET 2005



Ulf Wiger (AL/EAB) wrote:

>How well the different solutions stack up in this 
>regard (the documented characteristics) varies:
>
>- gb_sets: excellent Complexity note with examples
>- gb_trees: well, it does say that it's logarithmic
>- lists: says nothing, but perhaps it doesn't need to?
>- sets: only says that the representation (and, I
>        gather, also the complexity?) is undefined.
>- dict: same as for sets.
>- ets: briefly explains the characteristics of set 
>       and ordered_set
>  
>
Sets and dict both use the same algorithm internally as ets. It is a 
truly wonderful algorithm that I found but did not invent, though I wish 
that I had. Both have relatively constant access times up to about 
2-3000 elements and then they degrade gracefully. Or at least they should.

I personally thing that the dict interface is better and more consistent 
than ets, but as I wrote it that is not surprising.

Robert




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list