md5 as the key

[Venkatesh KS]

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

On 9/7/07, Dustin Sallings <dustin at spy.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 7, 2007, at 0:34, Venkatesh KS wrote:
>
> memcached supports variable length keys. But I am just curious as to why
> not use md5 instead of lengthy keys. The keylen requirements for my cache
> (which is very similar to  squid proxy) is very high and I am planning on
> using md5. I will read up to find out about the false positive probability.
> But going md5 way will certainly cap the keylen to 16bytes.
>
>
> You certainly can, but md5(``somestring'') is a lot more costly to compute
> than ``somestring''
>
> --
> Dustin Sallings
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/memcached/attachments/20070907/37804695/attachment.htm