From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Sep 24 10:31:17 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA12489
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 10:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12481
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 10:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.5/8.6.9) id DAA04836; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 03:26:09 +1000
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 03:26:09 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199709241726.DAA04836@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, nate@mt.sri.com
Subject: Re: new timeout routines
Cc: current@freebsd.org, gibbs@plutotech.com
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>> Hash lookup is non-deterministic, since searching is required to handlle
>> collisions.
>
>You had stated earlier that it would be easy to build a perfect hash
>generator.

Only for a special case.

>> handlers where we would prefer deterministic behaviour.  Note that hash
>> lookup is not required for timeout() since we don't care about duplicates.
>
>Right, but hash insertion in the case of duplicates is still
>non-deterministic.

No it isn't, at least for STAILQ chained hash tables.  Since we don't care
about duplicates, we can just add to the end of the queue.

Bruce