Balanced Allocations and Double Hashing

Double hashing has recently found more common usage in schemes that use multiple hash functions. In double hashing, for an item $x$, one generates two hash values $f(x)$ and $g(x)$, and then uses combinations $(f(x) +k g(x)) \bmod n$ for $k=0,1,2,...$ to generate multiple hash values from the initial two. We first perform an empirical study showing that, surprisingly, the performance difference between double hashing and fully random hashing appears negligible in the standard balanced allocation paradigm, where each item is placed in the least loaded of $d$ choices, as well as several related variants. We then provide theoretical results that explain the behavior of double hashing in this context.Comment: Further updated, small improvements/typos fixe

More Analysis of Double Hashing for Balanced Allocations

With double hashing, for a key $x$, one generates two hash values $f(x)$ and $g(x)$, and then uses combinations $(f(x) +i g(x)) \bmod n$ for $i=0,1,2,...$ to generate multiple hash values in the range $[0,n-1]$ from the initial two. For balanced allocations, keys are hashed into a hash table where each bucket can hold multiple keys, and each key is placed in the least loaded of $d$ choices. It has been shown previously that asymptotically the performance of double hashing and fully random hashing is the same in the balanced allocation paradigm using fluid limit methods. Here we extend a coupling argument used by Lueker and Molodowitch to show that double hashing and ideal uniform hashing are asymptotically equivalent in the setting of open address hash tables to the balanced allocation setting, providing further insight into this phenomenon. We also discuss the potential for and bottlenecks limiting the use this approach for other multiple choice hashing schemes.Comment: 13 pages ; current draft ; will be submitted to conference shortl

Load thresholds for cuckoo hashing with double hashing

In k-ary cuckoo hashing, each of cn objects is associated with k random buckets in a hash table of size n. An l-orientation is an assignment of objects to associated buckets such that each bucket receives at most l objects. Several works have determined load thresholds c^* = c^*(k,l) for k-ary cuckoo hashing; that is, for c c^* no l-orientation exists with high probability. A natural variant of k-ary cuckoo hashing utilizes double hashing, where, when the buckets are numbered 0,1,...,n-1, the k choices of random buckets form an arithmetic progression modulo n. Double hashing simplifies implementation and requires less randomness, and it has been shown that double hashing has the same behavior as fully random hashing in several other data structures that similarly use multiple hashes for each object. Interestingly, previous work has come close to but has not fully shown that the load threshold for k-ary cuckoo hashing is the same when using double hashing as when using fully random hashing. Specifically, previous work has shown that the thresholds for both settings coincide, except that for double hashing it was possible that o(n) objects would have been left unplaced. Here we close this open question by showing the thresholds are indeed the same, by providing a combinatorial argument that reconciles this stubborn difference