On Tue, Apr 01 2014 at 11:19pm -0400, Akira Hayakawa <hayakawa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But, I myself found that what I really need in my case is not the > RB tree but a simple list sorting (list_sort()). > > Will do sorting anyway. > > Enabling/disabling sorting in my case is really simple if I use list_sort() > and will do. The default should be ON because I also don't see any reason > to turn it off except benchmarking reason. list_sort() uses merge sort, which has O(nlog(n)) complexity; list_sort() also suffers from "list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency". But in practice I'm not sure how long a list needs to be to hit that case. Whereas an rb-tree has O(log(n)) complexity and is efficient for traversal, it also doesn't have the length limits. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
