News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Hans Peter Luhn and the Birth of the Hashing Algorithm. Parent comment

Re:Hans Peter Luhn and the Birth of the Hashing Algorithm by bogomipz on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @01:07PM (#16275979)
>"Seek/read time on these machines was on the order of a second, so a 10 level binary search could take around 10 seconds of total time. Unfortunately for IBM, this wasn't an improvement over the best human-driven manual lookup processes"

I am curious what human-driven manual lookup processes existed that could be in a single second?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Hans Peter Luhn and the Birth of the Hashing Algorithm by mschaef on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @02:38PM (#16276849)
A tub file:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tub_file

(Note that the overall search takes 10 seconds, not the one second of an individual seek... so the human had a bit more time to be competitive with the disk than a single second. :-) )

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Hans Peter Luhn and the Birth of the Hashing Algorithm by brian_cloutier on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @01:49PM (#16276395)
I have no information as to what the parent is referring to but 2^10 is 1024. That seems roughly in line with what a double-page spread of a phone book could show you; I don't think it's unreasonable that a trained human could search through one of those in under 10 seconds.
[ Parent | on HN ]