As can be seen in Table 4, the update complexity of BRPS and EffiCuts is the same, and is higher than PreCuts because with similar update method and lookup method, PreCuts only needs relatively low overhead to complete the update.
We implemented BRPS and EffiCuts with all optimizations used in  and , respectively.
In this part we compare the memory usage of BRPS, EffiCuts and PreCuts.
From the figure we can see that, for relatively small ruleset (less than 10k), PreCuts has similar memory usage as BRPS and EffiCuts, while for a larger ruleset (100k), the average memory usage of PreCuts is 27.
When processing ACL and IPC rulesets, BRPS and PreCuts have similar search performance, whereas, when processing FW rulesets, PreCuts is better.
BRPS has the similar performance with PreCuts thanks to its huge amount of complete optimized heuristics.
Since EffiCuts has no specific algorithms for incremental update, we only compare the update performance of BRPS and PreCuts, as is shown in Fig.
14 that, compared to BRPS, the number of the cycles that the incremental update of PreCuts needs will not increase significantly as the ruleset gets larger.
To throw in another tax rate calculation obstacle, BRPS acts as an arbitrator for the utilities special franchise property assessments and has not yet completed its calculations.
Last week, Council sources said the proposed tax rates - that will still change slightly once final numbers are accrued by BRPS for equalization ratios and special franchise hearings are completed, would be: