| From: | Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Sorting. Re: Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved) |
| Date: | 2002-04-03 15:13:31 |
| Message-ID: | 5.1.0.14.1.20020403221652.02bd3030@192.228.128.13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Just curious - why is solaris qsort that way? Any good reasons? I saw a
very old post by a solaris guy, but it didn't seem very convincing.
By the way are there faster sorts which Postgresql can use for its sorting
other than quick sort? e.g. BSD 4.4 radixsort (which DJB seems to keep
going on about :)).
Would it make a significant improvement in performance?
Cheerio,
Link.
p.s. We have postgresql on solaris too ;).
At 05:59 PM 4/3/02 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi Tom,
>
>How about we include this and have configure somehow ensure the Solaris
>users get it automatically?
>
>There are a *bunch* of Solaris users out there.
>
>:-)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | mlw | 2002-04-03 15:23:33 | Re: [GENERAL] Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved) |
| Previous Message | Jon Lapham | 2002-04-03 15:06:37 | Re: NaN with STDDEV() with mixed ::float4 ::float8 values |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2002-04-03 15:15:47 | Re: notification: pg_notify ? |
| Previous Message | Mikhail Terekhov | 2002-04-03 15:03:01 | Re: notification: pg_notify ? |