Re: qsort, once again

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>
Cc: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jerry Sievers" <jerry(at)jerrysievers(dot)com>
Subject: Re: qsort, once again
Date: 2006-03-16 20:09:10
Message-ID: 19646.1142539750@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> writes:
> I sent him a copy

Thanks. This is really interesting: the switch to insertion sort on
perfect pivot is simply not there in Bentley & McIlroy's paper. So
it was added later, and evidently not tested as carefully as it should
have been. At this point I'm more than half tempted to take it out
entirely.

So we still have a problem of software archaeology: who added the
insertion sort switch to the NetBSD version, and on what grounds?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2006-03-16 20:19:03 Re: qsort, once again
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2006-03-16 20:00:19 Re: BETWEEN optimizer problems with single-value