md5 as the key

[Dustin Sallings]

On Sep 7, 2007, at 1:48 , Venkatesh KS wrote:

> if keys are uri which could go upto a few hundred bytes then md5  
> would make sense?

	What you want to use for a key is up to you.  The only potential  
issue with md5 is how much time you'll be computing them for reads  
and writes.

> It all boils down the number of entries per bucket.
> I could hash on only 8 bytes and use the other 8 bytes for actual  
> comparison.

	What do you mean by bucket here?  Regardless of what you use as a  
key, the distribution should be relatively even.

-- 
Dustin Sallings


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/memcached/attachments/20070907/6df15305/attachment.html