On 8 Říjen 2013, 11:42, Atri Sharma wrote:
>>
>> I've made some significant improvements in the chaining version (in the
>> master branch), now getting about the memory consumption I've estimated.
>>
> I agree, we can hope to reduce the memory consumption by making changes in
> the current chaining implementation. I would like to look into changing
> the data structure used for chaining from singly linked list to maybe skip
> list or something else.
Just to be sure - I haven't been messing with the HashAggregate
implementation directly, but with a custom aggregate. But feel free to
tweak the built-in hash table ;-)
Tomas
