O(log N) == O(1) - Why not?

Posted by phoku on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by phoku
Published on 2009-09-29T10:40:01Z Indexed on 2010/06/12 23:23 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 230

Whenever I consider algorithms/data structures I tend to replace the log(N) parts by constants. Oh, I know log(N) diverges - but does it matter in real world applications?

log(infinity) < 100 for all practical purposes.

I am really curious for real world examples where this doesn't hold.

To clarify:

  • I understand O(f(N))
  • I am curious about real world examples where the asymptotic behaviour matters more than the constants of the actual performance.
  • If log(N) can be replaced by a constant it still can be replaced by a constant in O( N log N).

This question is for the sake of (a) entertainment and (b) to gather arguments to use if I run (again) into a controversy about the performance of a design.

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about Performance

Related posts about algorithm