在SortedList<TKey,TValue>和SortedDictionary<TKey,TValue>之间有任何真正的实际区别吗?在某些情况下,你会特别使用其中一种而不是另一种吗?
当前回答
这是性能之间相互比较的可视化表示。
其他回答
这是性能之间相互比较的可视化表示。
查看SortedList的MSDN页面:
备注部分:
The SortedList<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>) generic class is a binary search tree with O(log n) retrieval, where n is the number of elements in the dictionary. In this, it is similar to the SortedDictionary<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>) generic class. The two classes have similar object models, and both have O(log n) retrieval. Where the two classes differ is in memory use and speed of insertion and removal: SortedList<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>) uses less memory than SortedDictionary<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>). SortedDictionary<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>) has faster insertion and removal operations for unsorted data, O(log n) as opposed to O(n) for SortedList<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>). If the list is populated all at once from sorted data, SortedList<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>) is faster than SortedDictionary<(Of <(TKey, TValue>)>).
索引访问(这里提到)是实际的区别。 如果需要访问后继对象或前任对象,则需要SortedList。SortedDictionary无法做到这一点,因此您在如何使用排序(first / foreach)方面受到相当的限制。
是的,它们的表现特征有很大不同。将它们命名为SortedList和SortedTree可能更好,因为这样可以更准确地反映实现。
查看它们各自的MSDN文档(SortedList, SortedDictionary),了解不同情况下不同操作的性能细节。下面是一个很好的总结(来自SortedDictionary文档):
The SortedDictionary<TKey, TValue> generic class is a binary search tree with O(log n) retrieval, where n is the number of elements in the dictionary. In this, it is similar to the SortedList<TKey, TValue> generic class. The two classes have similar object models, and both have O(log n) retrieval. Where the two classes differ is in memory use and speed of insertion and removal: SortedList<TKey, TValue> uses less memory than SortedDictionary<TKey, TValue>. SortedDictionary<TKey, TValue> has faster insertion and removal operations for unsorted data, O(log n) as opposed to O(n) for SortedList<TKey, TValue>. If the list is populated all at once from sorted data, SortedList<TKey, TValue> is faster than SortedDictionary<TKey, TValue>.
(SortedList实际上维护一个排序的数组,而不是使用树。它仍然使用二进制搜索来查找元素。)
如果有用的话,这里有一个表格视图。
从性能角度看:
+------------------+---------+----------+--------+----------+----------+---------+
| Collection | Indexed | Keyed | Value | Addition | Removal | Memory |
| | lookup | lookup | lookup | | | |
+------------------+---------+----------+--------+----------+----------+---------+
| SortedList | O(1) | O(log n) | O(n) | O(n)* | O(n) | Lesser |
| SortedDictionary | O(n)** | O(log n) | O(n) | O(log n) | O(log n) | Greater |
+------------------+---------+----------+--------+----------+----------+---------+
* Insertion is O(log n) for data that are already in sort order, so that each
element is added to the end of the list. If a resize is required, that element
takes O(n) time, but inserting n elements is still amortized O(n log n).
list.
** Available through enumeration, e.g. Enumerable.ElementAt.
从实现的角度来看:
+------------+---------------+----------+------------+------------+------------------+
| Underlying | Lookup | Ordering | Contiguous | Data | Exposes Key & |
| structure | strategy | | storage | access | Value collection |
+------------+---------------+----------+------------+------------+------------------+
| 2 arrays | Binary search | Sorted | Yes | Key, Index | Yes |
| BST | Binary search | Sorted | No | Key | Yes |
+------------+---------------+----------+------------+------------+------------------+
粗略地解释一下,如果需要原始性能,SortedDictionary可能是更好的选择。如果需要较少的内存开销和索引检索,SortedList更适合。关于何时使用哪个,请参阅这个问题。
你可以在这里,这里,这里,这里和这里阅读更多。