sparsepp VS robin-hood-hashing

Compare sparsepp vs robin-hood-hashing and see what are their differences.

robin-hood-hashing

Fast & memory efficient hashtable based on robin hood hashing for C++11/14/17/20 (by martinus)
Our great sponsors
  • InfluxDB - Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale
  • WorkOS - The modern identity platform for B2B SaaS
  • SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
sparsepp robin-hood-hashing
4 23
1,224 1,465
- -
1.1 0.0
11 months ago 11 months ago
C++ C++
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later MIT License
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.

sparsepp

Posts with mentions or reviews of sparsepp. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2022-06-16.
  • Updating map_benchmarks: Send your hashmaps!
    13 projects | /r/cpp | 16 Jun 2022
    Also, I'm testing https://github.com/greg7mdp/sparsepp which is based on google's sparsehash
  • Who here is ready to see some 64MB blocks on mainnet?
    5 projects | /r/btc | 27 Oct 2021
    But it's pretty easy to address this. The CoinsViewCache's underlying storage is just a std::map<...>. A while ago, I replaced that with a sparsepp hashtable to improve the memory efficiency. It wasn't hard to do; took a couple of hours. We could do the same thing with a concurrent hashtable implementation. The hardest part of doing this would be picking an implementation and validating that it's mature and stable enough to be used in BCHN. Intel's Threading Building Blocks has some good candidates, but it's also possible that another implementation might be more suitable.
    5 projects | /r/btc | 27 Oct 2021
    Hey thanks for the mention /u/jtoomim. I see that you used sparsepp in CoinsViewCache. A phmap::flat_hash_map would probably be similar for memory usage, but likely faster (because of parallel lookup with SSE instructions and contiguous memory storage in one array).

robin-hood-hashing

Posts with mentions or reviews of robin-hood-hashing. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-11-10.
  • Factor is faster than Zig
    11 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 10 Nov 2023
    In my example the table stores the hash codes themselves instead of the keys (because the hash function is invertible)

    Oh, I see, right. If determining the home bucket is trivial, then the back-shifting method is great. The issue is just that it’s not as much of a general-purpose solution as it may initially seem.

    “With a different algorithm (Robin Hood or bidirectional linear probing), the load factor can be kept well over 90% with good performance, as the benchmarks in the same repo demonstrate.”

    I’ve seen the 90% claim made several times in literature on Robin Hood hash tables. In my experience, the claim is a bit exaggerated, although I suppose it depends on what our idea of “good performance” is. See these benchmarks, which again go up to a maximum load factor of 0.95 (Although boost and Absl forcibly grow/rehash at 0.85-0.9):

    https://strong-starlight-4ea0ed.netlify.app/

    Tsl, Martinus, and CC are all Robin Hood tables (https://github.com/Tessil/robin-map, https://github.com/martinus/robin-hood-hashing, and https://github.com/JacksonAllan/CC, respectively). Absl and Boost are the well-known SIMD-based hash tables. Khash (https://github.com/attractivechaos/klib/blob/master/khash.h) is, I think, an ordinary open-addressing table using quadratic probing. Fastmap is a new, yet-to-be-published design that is fundamentally similar to bytell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2fKMP47slQ) but also incorporates some aspects of the aforementioned SIMD maps (it caches a 4-bit fragment of the hash code to avoid most key comparisons).

    As you can see, all the Robin Hood maps spike upwards dramatically as the load factor gets high, becoming as much as 5-6 times slower at 0.95 vs 0.5 in one of the benchmarks (uint64_t key, 256-bit struct value: Total time to erase 1000 existing elements with N elements in map). Only the SIMD maps (with Boost being the better performer) and Fastmap appear mostly immune to load factor in all benchmarks, although the SIMD maps do - I believe - use tombstones for deletion.

    I’ve only read briefly about bi-directional linear probing – never experimented with it.

  • If this isn't the perfect data structure, why?
    3 projects | /r/C_Programming | 22 Oct 2023
    From your other comments, it seems like your knowledge of hash tables might be limited to closed-addressing/separate-chaining hash tables. The current frontrunners in high-performance, memory-efficient hash table design all use some form of open addressing, largely to avoid pointer chasing and limit cache misses. In this regard, you want to check our SSE-powered hash tables (such as Abseil, Boost, and Folly/F14), Robin Hood hash tables (such as Martinus and Tessil), or Skarupke (I've recently had a lot of success with a similar design that I will publish here soon and is destined to replace my own Robin Hood hash tables). Also check out existing research/benchmarks here and here. But we a little bit wary of any benchmarks you look at or perform because there are a lot of factors that influence the result (e.g. benchmarking hash tables at a maximum load factor of 0.5 will produce wildly different result to benchmarking them at a load factor of 0.95, just as benchmarking them with integer keys-value pairs will produce different results to benchmarking them with 256-byte key-value pairs). And you need to familiarize yourself with open addressing and different probing strategies (e.g. linear, quadratic) first.
  • boost::unordered standalone
    3 projects | /r/cpp | 9 Jul 2023
    Also, FYI there is robin_hood::unordered_{map,set} which has very high performance, and is header-only and standalone.
  • Convenient Containers v1.0.3: Better compile speed, faster maps and sets
    4 projects | /r/C_Programming | 3 May 2023
    The main advantage of the latest version is that it reduces build time by about 53% (GCC 12.1), based on the comprehensive test suit found in unit_tests.c. This improvement is significant because compile time was previously a drawback of this library, with maps and sets—in particular—compiling slower than their C++ template-based counterparts. I achieved it by refactoring the library to do less work inside API macros and, in particular, use fewer _Generic statements, which seem to be a compile-speed bottleneck. A nice side effect of the refactor is that the library can now more easily be extended with the planned dynamic strings and ordered maps and sets. The other major improvement concerns the performance of maps and sets. Here are some interactive benchmarks[1] comparing CC’s maps to two popular implementations of Robin Hood hash maps in C++ (as well as std::unordered_map as a baseline). They show that CC maps perform roughly on par with those implementations.
  • Effortless Performance Improvements in C++: std:unordered_map
    4 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 2 Mar 2023
    For anyone in a situation where a set/map (or unordered versions) is in a hot part of the code, I'd also highly recommend Robin Hood: https://github.com/martinus/robin-hood-hashing

    It made a huge difference in one of the programs I was running.

  • Inside boost::unordered_flat_map
    11 projects | /r/cpp | 18 Nov 2022
  • What are some cool modern libraries you enjoy using?
    32 projects | /r/cpp | 18 Sep 2022
    Oh my bad. Still thought -- your name.. it looks very familiar to me. Are you the robin_hood hashing guy perhaps? Yes you are! My bad -- https://github.com/martinus/robin-hood-hashing.
  • Performance comparison: counting words in Python, C/C++, Awk, Rust, and more
    12 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 24 Jul 2022
    Got a bit better C++ version here which uses a couple libraries instead of std:: stuff - https://gist.github.com/jcelerier/74dfd473bccec8f1bd5d78be5a... ; boost, fmt and https://github.com/martinus/robin-hood-hashing

        $ g++ -I robin-hood-hashing/src/include -O2 -flto -std=c++20 -fno-exceptions -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -lfmt
  • A fast &amp; densely stored hashmap and hashset based on robin-hood backward shift deletion
    5 projects | /r/cpp | 4 Jul 2022
    The implementation is mostly inspired by this comment and lessons learned from my older robin-hood-hashing hashmap.
  • boost::unordered map is a new king of data structures
    10 projects | /r/cpp | 30 Jun 2022
    Unordered hash map shootout CMAP = https://github.com/tylov/STC KMAP = https://github.com/attractivechaos/klib PMAP = https://github.com/greg7mdp/parallel-hashmap FMAP = https://github.com/skarupke/flat_hash_map RMAP = https://github.com/martinus/robin-hood-hashing HMAP = https://github.com/Tessil/hopscotch-map TMAP = https://github.com/Tessil/robin-map UMAP = std::unordered_map Usage: shootout [n-million=40 key-bits=25] Random keys are in range [0, 2^25). Seed = 1656617916: T1: Insert/update random keys: KMAP: time: 1.949, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554432, sum: 165525449561381 CMAP: time: 1.649, size: 15064129, buckets: 22145833, sum: 165525449561381 PMAP: time: 2.434, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554431, sum: 165525449561381 FMAP: time: 2.112, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554432, sum: 165525449561381 RMAP: time: 1.708, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554431, sum: 165525449561381 HMAP: time: 2.054, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554432, sum: 165525449561381 TMAP: time: 1.645, size: 15064129, buckets: 33554432, sum: 165525449561381 UMAP: time: 6.313, size: 15064129, buckets: 31160981, sum: 165525449561381 T2: Insert sequential keys, then remove them in same order: KMAP: time: 1.173, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 20000000 CMAP: time: 1.651, size: 0, buckets: 33218751, erased 20000000 PMAP: time: 3.840, size: 0, buckets: 33554431, erased 20000000 FMAP: time: 1.722, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 20000000 RMAP: time: 2.359, size: 0, buckets: 33554431, erased 20000000 HMAP: time: 0.849, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 20000000 TMAP: time: 0.660, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 20000000 UMAP: time: 2.138, size: 0, buckets: 31160981, erased 20000000 T3: Remove random keys: KMAP: time: 1.973, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 23367671 CMAP: time: 2.020, size: 0, buckets: 33218751, erased 23367671 PMAP: time: 2.940, size: 0, buckets: 33554431, erased 23367671 FMAP: time: 1.147, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 23367671 RMAP: time: 1.941, size: 0, buckets: 33554431, erased 23367671 HMAP: time: 1.135, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 23367671 TMAP: time: 1.064, size: 0, buckets: 33554432, erased 23367671 UMAP: time: 5.632, size: 0, buckets: 31160981, erased 23367671 T4: Iterate random keys: KMAP: time: 0.748, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 CMAP: time: 0.627, size: 23367671, buckets: 33218751, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 PMAP: time: 0.680, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554431, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 FMAP: time: 0.735, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 RMAP: time: 0.464, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554431, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 HMAP: time: 0.719, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 TMAP: time: 0.662, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 UMAP: time: 6.168, size: 23367671, buckets: 31160981, repeats: 8, sum: 4465059465719680 T5: Lookup random keys: KMAP: time: 0.943, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 CMAP: time: 0.863, size: 23367671, buckets: 33218751, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 PMAP: time: 1.635, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554431, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 FMAP: time: 0.969, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 RMAP: time: 1.705, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554431, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 HMAP: time: 0.712, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 TMAP: time: 0.584, size: 23367671, buckets: 33554432, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438 UMAP: time: 1.974, size: 23367671, buckets: 31160981, lookups: 34235332, found: 29040438

What are some alternatives?

When comparing sparsepp and robin-hood-hashing you can also consider the following projects:

parallel-hashmap - A family of header-only, very fast and memory-friendly hashmap and btree containers.

PEGTL - Parsing Expression Grammar Template Library

Inja - A Template Engine for Modern C++

STL - MSVC's implementation of the C++ Standard Library.

robin-map - C++ implementation of a fast hash map and hash set using robin hood hashing

Hashmaps - Various open addressing hashmap algorithms in C++

LSHBOX - A c++ toolbox of locality-sensitive hashing (LSH), provides several popular LSH algorithms, also support python and matlab.

dynamic_bitset - Simple Useful Libraries: C++17/20 header-only dynamic bitset

FunctionalPlus - Functional Programming Library for C++. Write concise and readable C++ code.

xxHash - Extremely fast non-cryptographic hash algorithm

Optional Argument in C++ - Named Optional Arguments in C++17

C++ Format - A modern formatting library