Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Jeremy Harris <jgh(at)wizmail(dot)org> wrote:

> On 25/02/15 00:32, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> > On 23/02/15 16:40, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> On 22.2.2015 22:30, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >>> You should try it with the data fully sorted like this, but with one
> >>> tiny difference: The very last tuple is out of order. How does that
> >>> look?
> >
> > If this case is actually important, a merge-sort can take
> > significant advantage of the partial order:
>
> Presumably it is not, as nobody commented
> on the alleged 20 or 30x speedup.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

Does it always perform mergesort instead of quicksort when enabled?
Seems like the case for a hybrid sort (like timsort). I know there was some
talk to replace quicksort with timsort back in 2012 but it was a deadend at
the time.