| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> |
| Cc: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Mark kirkwood <markir(at)slingshot(dot)co(dot)nz>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved) |
| Date: | 2002-04-03 16:25:15 |
| Message-ID: | 9714.1017851115@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> writes:
> Actually, the C standard says nothing about what algorithm should be
> used for qsort(); it's simply supposed to be a fast in-memory sort.
> The qsort() name is just a historical artifact.
In practice I believe qsort usually is a quicksort; it's just too good
of a general-purpose algorithm. However you do need a good heuristic
for selecting the median value to split on, or you can get burnt by
corner cases. I'm guessing that Sun was careless and got burnt ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-04-03 16:25:59 | Re: do foreign key checks lock parent table ? |
| Previous Message | mlw | 2002-04-03 16:24:18 | Re: [GENERAL] Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-04-03 16:25:39 | Re: Odd psql \i behaviour |
| Previous Message | mlw | 2002-04-03 16:24:18 | Re: [GENERAL] Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved) |