Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris
Date
Msg-id 87ejtp6ri8.fsf@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris  ("Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> So basically, glibc's qsort is bad enough that even a
> 10%-more-comparisons advantage doesn't save it.

Actually what I was more concerned about was things like on data structures
with complex comparison routines. Things like sorting on arrays or ROWs.

For that matter it seems to me that sorting on a single column is a pretty
unrealistic scenario too. Most of the time I find queries have long lists of
columns in the ORDER BY clause.

Do those numbers look very different if you have lots of columns or if you're
sorting on something like an array or a ROW?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris
Next
From: "Merlin Moncure"
Date:
Subject: Re: Pie-in-sky dreaming about reworking tuple layout entirely