What's an appropriate search/retrieval method for a VERY long list of strings?
Solution 1:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Linq;
using System.Security.Cryptography;
namespace HashsetTest
{
abstract class HashLookupBase
{
protected const int BucketCount = 16;
private readonly HashAlgorithm _hasher;
protected HashLookupBase()
{
_hasher = SHA256.Create();
}
public abstract void AddHash(byte[] data);
public abstract bool Contains(byte[] data);
private byte[] ComputeHash(byte[] data)
{
return _hasher.ComputeHash(data);
}
protected Data256Bit GetHashObject(byte[] data)
{
var hash = ComputeHash(data);
return Data256Bit.FromBytes(hash);
}
public virtual void CompleteAdding() { }
}
class HashsetHashLookup : HashLookupBase
{
private readonly HashSet<Data256Bit>[] _hashSets;
public HashsetHashLookup()
{
_hashSets = new HashSet<Data256Bit>[BucketCount];
for(int i = 0; i < _hashSets.Length; i++)
_hashSets[i] = new HashSet<Data256Bit>();
}
public override void AddHash(byte[] data)
{
var item = GetHashObject(data);
var offset = item.GetHashCode() & 0xF;
_hashSets[offset].Add(item);
}
public override bool Contains(byte[] data)
{
var target = GetHashObject(data);
var offset = target.GetHashCode() & 0xF;
return _hashSets[offset].Contains(target);
}
}
class ArrayHashLookup : HashLookupBase
{
private Data256Bit[][] _objects;
private int[] _offsets;
private int _bucketCounter;
public ArrayHashLookup(int size)
{
size /= BucketCount;
_objects = new Data256Bit[BucketCount][];
_offsets = new int[BucketCount];
for(var i = 0; i < BucketCount; i++) _objects[i] = new Data256Bit[size + 1];
_bucketCounter = 0;
}
public override void CompleteAdding()
{
for(int i = 0; i < BucketCount; i++) Array.Sort(_objects[i]);
}
public override void AddHash(byte[] data)
{
var hashObject = GetHashObject(data);
_objects[_bucketCounter][_offsets[_bucketCounter]++] = hashObject;
_bucketCounter++;
_bucketCounter %= BucketCount;
}
public override bool Contains(byte[] data)
{
var hashObject = GetHashObject(data);
return _objects.Any(o => Array.BinarySearch(o, hashObject) >= 0);
}
}
struct Data256Bit : IEquatable<Data256Bit>, IComparable<Data256Bit>
{
public bool Equals(Data256Bit other)
{
return _u1 == other._u1 && _u2 == other._u2 && _u3 == other._u3 && _u4 == other._u4;
}
public int CompareTo(Data256Bit other)
{
var rslt = _u1.CompareTo(other._u1); if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
rslt = _u2.CompareTo(other._u2); if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
rslt = _u3.CompareTo(other._u3); if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
return _u4.CompareTo(other._u4);
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (ReferenceEquals(null, obj))
return false;
return obj is Data256Bit && Equals((Data256Bit) obj);
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
unchecked
{
var hashCode = _u1.GetHashCode();
hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ _u2.GetHashCode();
hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ _u3.GetHashCode();
hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ _u4.GetHashCode();
return hashCode;
}
}
public static bool operator ==(Data256Bit left, Data256Bit right)
{
return left.Equals(right);
}
public static bool operator !=(Data256Bit left, Data256Bit right)
{
return !left.Equals(right);
}
private readonly long _u1;
private readonly long _u2;
private readonly long _u3;
private readonly long _u4;
private Data256Bit(long u1, long u2, long u3, long u4)
{
_u1 = u1;
_u2 = u2;
_u3 = u3;
_u4 = u4;
}
public static Data256Bit FromBytes(byte[] data)
{
return new Data256Bit(
BitConverter.ToInt64(data, 0),
BitConverter.ToInt64(data, 8),
BitConverter.ToInt64(data, 16),
BitConverter.ToInt64(data, 24)
);
}
}
class Program
{
private const int TestSize = 150000000;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
GC.Collect(3);
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
{
var arrayHashLookup = new ArrayHashLookup(TestSize);
PerformBenchmark(arrayHashLookup, TestSize);
}
GC.Collect(3);
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
{
var hashsetHashLookup = new HashsetHashLookup();
PerformBenchmark(hashsetHashLookup, TestSize);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
private static void PerformBenchmark(HashLookupBase hashClass, int size)
{
var sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
hashClass.AddHash(BitConverter.GetBytes(i * 2));
Console.WriteLine("Hashing and addition took " + sw.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
sw.Restart();
hashClass.CompleteAdding();
Console.WriteLine("Hash cleanup (sorting, usually) took " + sw.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
sw.Restart();
var found = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < size * 2; i += 10)
{
found += hashClass.Contains(BitConverter.GetBytes(i)) ? 1 : 0;
}
Console.WriteLine("Found " + found + " elements (expected " + (size / 5) + ") in " + sw.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
}
}
}
Results are pretty promising. They run single-threaded. The hashset version can hit a little over 1 million lookups per second at 7.9GB RAM usage. The array-based version uses less RAM (4.6GB). Startup times between the two are nearly identical (388 vs 391 seconds). The hashset trades RAM for lookup performance. Both had to be bucketized because of memory allocation constraints.
Array performance:
Hashing and addition took 307408ms
Hash cleanup (sorting, usually) took 81892ms
Found 30000000 elements (expected 30000000) in 562585ms [53k searches per second]
======================================
Hashset performance:
Hashing and addition took 391105ms
Hash cleanup (sorting, usually) took 0ms
Found 30000000 elements (expected 30000000) in 74864ms [400k searches per second]
Solution 2:
If the list changes over time, I would put it in a database.
If the list doesn't change, I would put it in a sorted file and do a binary search for every query.
In both cases, I would use a Bloom filter to minimize I/O. And I would stop using strings and use the binary representation with four ulongs (to avoid the object reference cost).
If you have more than 16 GB (2*64*4/3*100M, assuming Base64 encoding) to spare, an option is to make a Set<string> and be happy. Of course it would fit in less than 7 GB if you use the binary representation.
David Haney's answer shows us that the memory cost is not so easily calculated.
Solution 3:
With <gcAllowVeryLargeObjects>, you can have arrays that are much larger. Why not convert those ASCII representations of 256-bit hash codes to a custom struct that implements IComparable<T>? It would look like this:
struct MyHashCode: IComparable<MyHashCode>
{
// make these readonly and provide a constructor
ulong h1, h2, h3, h4;
public int CompareTo(MyHashCode other)
{
var rslt = h1.CompareTo(other.h1);
if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
rslt = h2.CompareTo(other.h2);
if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
rslt = h3.CompareTo(other.h3);
if (rslt != 0) return rslt;
return h4.CompareTo(other.h4);
}
}
You can then create an array of these, which would occupy approximately 3.2 GB. You can search it easy enough with Array.BinarySearch.
Of course, you'll need to convert the user's input from ASCII to one of those hash code structures, but that's easy enough.
As for performance, this isn't going to be as fast as a hash table, but it's certainly going to be faster than a database lookup or file operations.
Come to think of it, you could create a HashSet<MyHashCode>. You'd have to override the Equals method on MyHashCode, but that's really easy. As I recall, the HashSet costs something like 24 bytes per entry, and you'd have the added cost of the larger struct. Figure five or six gigabytes, total, if you were to use a HashSet. More memory, but still doable, and you get O(1) lookup.