Seebs aab42e97a4 tune b+tree values ... Did some benchmarking with b+tree values. The actual interactions appear to be slightly inconsistent; some values seem to help more in cases with higher OpN in benchmarks, others with lower OpN. It appears that the practical consideration may be what happens when a snapshot gets triggered; smaller kx/kd appear to reduce costs there, but increase costs between snapshots. This is a bit of guesswork. Numbers are slighly under powers of 2, because that means that the total actual sizes of k and d end up fitting nicely in alloc pool sizes.		2019-03-28 15:42:00 -05:00
..
testdata	cleanup #1622	2018-09-06 16:27:10 -05:00
btree.go	tune b+tree values	2019-03-28 15:42:00 -05:00
container_stash.go	unbreak a subtle breakage that only test cases could hit	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
containers.go	Add stash-based implementation of Container	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
containers_btree.go	Add stash-based implementation of Container	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
containers_test.go	Abstract away access to container slices	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring.go	move comment to right place	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring_helpers_test.go	Abstract away access to container slices	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring_internal_test.go	clean up some leftover bits from previous implementation	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring_nop_paranoia.go	Abstract away access to container slices	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring_nop_stats.go	proof of concept for stats	2018-11-15 15:10:48 -06:00
roaring_paranoia.go	Abstract away access to container slices	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00
roaring_stats.go	proof of concept for stats	2018-11-15 15:10:48 -06:00
roaring_test.go	Abstract away access to container slices	2019-03-22 16:31:29 -05:00