Re: [PATCH 0/5] rbtree based interval tree as a prio_treereplacement

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 00:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> a faster worst-case complexity of O(k+log N) for stabbing queries in a
> well-balanced prio tree, vs O(k*log N) for interval trees (where k=number
> of matches, N=number of intervals). Now this sounds great, but in practice
> prio trees don't realize this theorical benefit. First, the additional
> constraint makes them harder to update, so that the kernel implementation
> has to simplify things by balancing them like a radix tree, which is not
> always ideal. 

Not something spending a great deal of time on, but do you have any idea
what the radix like balancing does the the worst case stabbing
complexity?

Anyway, I like the thing, that prio-tree code always made my head hurt.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/