| From: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Which qsort is used |
| Date: | 2005-12-17 01:14:17 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0512162010320.28357@eon.cs |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> At this point, I think we have done enough testing on enough platforms
> to just use port/qsort on all platforms in 8.2. It seems whenever
> someone tries to improve the BSD qsort, they make it worse.
>
Not necessariliy true. Dann Corbit sent me an implementation a while ago
(you can see it on the same site). BSD qsort is improved, though not that
much, by two methods. Since Dann write the program from scratch, so I am
not sure if we are afford to take the efforts for the improvement.
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2005-12-17 01:17:56 | Re: Re: Which qsort is used |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-12-17 01:08:13 | Re: Re: Which qsort is used |