Re: Highly Efficient Custom Sorting

From: Eliot Gable <egable+pgsql-performance(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Highly Efficient Custom Sorting
Date: 2010-07-07 19:23:12
Message-ID: AANLkTinXIAgV0feBOY9znKyt35nB3CzrUKr3ynnykEF9@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Thanks again for all the input and suggestions from people. I have this
sorting algorithm re-implemented in C now and it is somewhere <2ms to run it
now; though it is difficult to get a more accurate measure. There may be
some additional optimizations I can come up with, but for now, this will
work very well compared to the alternative methods.

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Eliot Gable <egable+pgsql-performance(at)gmail(dot)com<egable%2Bpgsql-performance(at)gmail(dot)com>>
> writes:
> > Do I need to somehow force the server to unload and then re-load this .so
> > file each time I build a new version of it? If so, how do I do that?
>
> Start a new database session.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Eliot Gable

"We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors: we borrow it from our
children." ~David Brower

"I decided the words were too conservative for me. We're not borrowing from
our children, we're stealing from them--and it's not even considered to be a
crime." ~David Brower

"Esse oportet ut vivas, non vivere ut edas." (Thou shouldst eat to live; not
live to eat.) ~Marcus Tullius Cicero

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Yen 2010-07-07 19:32:17 Re: [Slony1-general] WAL partition overloaded--by autovacuum?
Previous Message Richard Yen 2010-07-07 16:39:11 Re: [Slony1-general] WAL partition overloaded--by autovacuum?