FNV-1a seems like a questionable choice. You can get higher quality and throughput for short strings from a hash that uses AES instructions or wyhash, or for long strings maybe from xxhash.

> If your input is made of integers, or is a short, fixed length, use an integer permutation, particularly multiply-xorshift. It takes very little to get a sufficient distribution. Sometimes one multiplication does the trick. Fixed-sized, integer-permutation hashes tend to be the fastest, easily beating fancier SIMD-based hashes, including AES-NI. For example:

This is... probably not true? If you want to hash exactly 16 bytes, you can do it in 4 instructions on x64 like this:

  const u8x16 chunk0 = _mm_loadu_si128((u8x16*)data);
  const u8x16 h10 = _mm_aesenc_si128(chunk0, key);
  const u8x16 h20 = _mm_aesenc_si128(h10, key);
  const u64 hash = _mm_extract_epi64(h20, 0);

If the total latency of these instructions is a bit higher than the total latency of the 8 instructions in the provided uuid1_hash, but if you want to hash more than 1 value, you may find that hashing more values allows the 4-instruction approach to achieve higher throughput than the 8-instruction approach. Even 2 values at a time should do it. For example on Haswell the combined latency seems to be 16 cycles for load+aesenc+aesenc+store vs. 12 for 2 shifts, 2 multiplies, 2 xors and 2 adds (the adds and multiplies are arranged in such a way that lea may not be used). I tried uuid1_hash on godbolt.org and it actually emitted a bunch of mov's in addition to what I expected.

I am of course not an expert in these matters, and the fine author is invited to publish a benchmark or to demonstrate the superiority of his hash table and his method for hashing short strings at https://highload.fun/tasks/2