Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I tried it in Ruby in ~2006, and found that many operations in Rinda were O(n) in the size of the tuple space :(


Interesting. Could a better-than-O(n) parallelisable tuple space be implemented with something like skip lists?


Tuplespace is all about lookups/publish/subscribe on filters on the tuples. For the vast majority of the time, filters are of the form of (<string>, <type>, ...) or (<string>, <value>, ...) . You don't need to use skip lists (or binary trees generally) for that, you can use nested hash tables on the prefix/suffix of the tuples. Then you get O(len(filters)) instead of O(log(size of tuple space)). Trust me when I say that using hashes of filters is a lot faster.

Also, see my higher-ranked post about why I stopped using tuple spaces.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: