Explain a situation where you could change the runtime of a hash table from O(1) to O(n) when using chaining

Suppose you have a hash table of size N = 64, and you are using quadratic probing. The keys in your hash are 4-digit integers (0000 through 9999) and your hash function is h(k) = (the sum of the digits in k). Assuming keys are uniformly random over the range 0000 to 9999, is this a good hash function? (Answer true for yes, false for no). True False

Is there a hash table that can handle m-sized linked lists? Is there a list of goals that should be met while using a hash function? Can you give me an instance of this?

A hash-map has been constructed with quadratic-hashing. The hashing function is h(k;) = (3 * k; + 7) mod 17 and the table length is N = 17. How many cells will be probed by the call of insert(2) 1 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 26 89 11 35 70 59 Note: First row contains the indices and the second row contains the items.

Is it consistent to say that a hash table of size m always contains the same number of linked lists? I've been trying to understand the purpose of a hash function for ages. Give an illustration of your point with an example.

However, our hash map was poorly constructed, so all of the values are now in the same pile (that is, they are all in the same LinkedList). To what extent does this defeat the purpose of a hash map, please explain.

The Java hash function for Strings computes a hash code based on a fixed maximum number of characters of the string. Given that Strings have no meaningful upper bound in length, describe how an effective, constant-time hashing algorithm can be constructed. (Hint: If you were to pick, say, eight characters to represent a string of length l, which would you choose?)

I am trying to implement a hash table of key-value pairs, where the key determines the location of the pair in the hash table, the key is what the hash function is used on. The hash table that I am trying to implement will use separate chaining  (with unordered linked lists) for collision resolution.   I need help changing the code where: 1. The "search" method of the code returns the node that was found or "None" 2. The "Node" implementation has a "key" and "value" member   This is what I have so far class Node:   def __init__(self,initdata):     self.data = initdata     self.next = None     def getData(self):     return self.data     def getNext(self):     return self.next     def setData(self,newdata):     self.data = newdata     def setNext(self,newnext):     self.next = newnext     class UnorderedList:     def __init__(self):     self.head = None     def isEmpty(self):     return self.head == None     def add(self,item):     temp = Node(item)     temp.setNext(self.head)…

Can m-size linked lists be stored in a hash table? Why do we need to use a hash function, exactly? Give us a sample.

What is the time complexity of delete function in the hash table using a doubly linked list?a) O(1)b) O(n)c) O(log n)d) O(n log n)