Improve performance of ordered set implementation #273
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Adds an index-tracking dict similar to other Python OrderedSet implementations, but keeps the same API.
|
Hello, please be careful with implementation using a dictionary in dnspython. It may happen that the same entries from DNS POW are evaluated as different in dictionary, because dnspython has mutable objects without properly implemented hash methods. Please check #268 for details. |
|
In general I support this work but please make sure that you accomodate comments from @MartinBasti . |
pspacek
requested changes
Jul 17, 2018
Merged
|
rrsets were optimized in a slightly different way |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds an index-tracking dict similar to other Python OrderedSet implementations, but keeps the same API.
My company has many SRV records with 400+ entries in them. The time-complexity of this set implementation was causing lookups of those records to take 100's of seconds on beefy servers. This brings it down to milliseconds.
This should also solve: #259