Dynamic hash tables

> The cost is more significant where it is some random buckets that have been split

Which is exactly what my algorithm does NOT do.

Chances are, my algorithm converts the key to the bucket rather faster than a standard hash algorithm (it uses and(), not mod().). And there's no fancy logic past that - the bucket is the right bucket, first time, EVERY TIME. There's no such thing as a "split bucket" structure.

(And if it hits a linked list, it's a failure mode ... it's intended to identify the right disk block first time every time - a disk miss is *expensive*. It handles it - it has to - but because it's expensive it's not a good idea. The miss rate is typically 5%)

Cheers,
Wol