From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Which qsort is used |
Date: | 2005-12-12 16:50:10 |
Message-ID: | 200512121650.jBCGoAP21133@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Qingqing Zhou wrote:
>
> Seems we don't link against the port/qsort.c - is there any reason for
> that? My tests indicates our qsort is much much faster than the libc's.
We haven't been able to determine if the OS's qsort or pgport's is
faster. Right now we only force pgport qsort on Solaris (from
configure.in):
# Solaris has a very slow qsort in certain cases, so we replace it.
if test "$PORTNAME" = "solaris"; then
AC_LIBOBJ(qsort)
fi
Are you willing to say that we should always prefer pgport over glibc's
qsort()?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2005-12-12 17:04:25 | Re: Foreign key trigger timing bug? |
Previous Message | Qingqing Zhou | 2005-12-12 16:41:51 | Which qsort is used |