Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:27:59 -0700 From: "T.C. Gubatayao" <tgubatayao@barracuda.com> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> Cc: Jack F Vogel <jfv@freebsd.org>, "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@freebsd.org>, "net@freebsd.org" <net@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Flow ID, LACP, and igb Message-ID: <BCC2C62D4FE171479E2F1C2593FE508B0BE24383@BN-SCL-MBX03.Cudanet.local> In-Reply-To: <521EE8DA.3060107@freebsd.org> References: <D01A0CB2-B1E3-4F4B-97FA-4C821C0E3FD2@FreeBSD.org> <521BBD21.4070304@freebsd.org> <CAOtMX2jvKGY==t9i-a_8RtMAPH2p1VDj950nMHHouryoz3nbsA@mail.gmail.com>, <521EE8DA.3060107@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> No problem with fnv_hash(). Doesn't it have bad mixing? Good distribution is important since this code= is for load balancing. FNV is also slower compared to most of the newer non-cryptographic hashes, certainly on large keys, but even on small ones. Of course, performance wi= ll vary with the architecture. > While I agree that it is likely that siphash24() is slower if you could a= fford > the time do a test run it would be great to from guess to know. +1 You might want to consider lookup3 too, since it's also readily available i= n the kernel [1]. T.C. [1] http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/libkern/jenkins_hash.c?view=3Dm= arkup=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BCC2C62D4FE171479E2F1C2593FE508B0BE24383>