# Re: Binary Search

*From*: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:17:17 +1300

In message <imikdg120s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Wojcik wrote:

Patricia Shanahan wrote:

I would recommend comparing its performance to a linear search with the

data in descending order of historical access frequency.

You could implement the latter constraint (data in descending order of

access) dynamically using a move-to-front list, though you'd want a

data structure that offers cheap insertion at the front.

Or you could simply maintain an access counter attached to each element, and

re-sort after every, say, 10**n lookups (for n ≥ 3 or something).

.

**References**:**Binary Search***From:*Roedy Green

**Re: Binary Search***From:*Peter Duniho

**Re: Binary Search***From:*Roedy Green

**Re: Binary Search***From:*Patricia Shanahan

**Re: Binary Search***From:*Michael Wojcik

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Binary Search** - Next by Date:
**Re: ORM or JDBC?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Binary Search** - Next by thread:
**Re: Binary Search** - Index(es):