Gave tr1::unordered_map a try, it seems to do perfectly average, nothing spectacular, nothing awful, except for predict_grow with 4 byte objects, where it‚??s almost 10x slower than the next implementation (that‚??s not an anomaly, it happens every time).
I also found a bug in RDE where I overoptimized it a little bit ‚?? could result in a crash when searching for item that‚??s just been removed. It slowed fetch by about 3%, however later I found a way to remove some branches and sped it up by ~6% again, so final version is even faster. It made fetch_empty much slower (no early exit), but I don‚??t care about this scenario too much (how often do you actually care about quick lookup in an empty map?) and am willing to trade it for higher performance in 99% of cases. x86 (desktop machine) graphs below (two versions for 4 byte objects, as TR1 skewed the results quite a bit):
I also ran tests on X360 (only dense_hash_map, EASTL & RDE). It should be said, they‚??re not terribly realistic, especially ‚??fetch‚??, after all it‚??s not normal to just sequentially fetch 50k objects one by one. To make it at least a tiny bit more interesting I added fetch2 test, which does the following:
- objects are fetched in a random order, not sequentially,
- every 64-th iteration, it tries to find item that‚??s not present in the map.
Xenon results (nice thing about them is they‚??re much more consistent, differ by maybe 1-3ns from run to run):
Obviously, it‚??s still quite far from real-life applications, so it‚??s best to just plug in some of those implementations and give them a test drive.