| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input within qsort variants? |
| Date: | 2013-03-08 20:00:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_VVR9ZOTjpa76bOHBXMskujLeRTwEgdJNR+fNJmVnAUxw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8 March 2013 11:48, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 07:43:10PM +0000, Dann Corbit wrote:
>> I seem to recall that a year or two back some study was done on
>> quicksort methodology as used in PostgreSQL. As I recall, the
>> algorithm used in PostgreSQL fared well in the tests.
>
> Well, that's good to hear.
I wouldn't mind taking a look at that. We're not the only ones that
use (more or less) that same algorithm. I noticed that Redis does so
too, just for example (though they didn't get wise to the problems
with the "swap_cnt" pessimisation).
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2013-03-08 20:11:29 | Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input within qsort variants? |
| Previous Message | 'Bruce Momjian' | 2013-03-08 19:48:15 | Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input within qsort variants? |