Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create

Ron <rjpeace@earthlink.net> writes:
> Your cost comment basically agrees with mine regarding the cost of 
> random memory accesses.  The good news is that the number of datums 
> to be examined during the pivot choosing process is small enough that 
> the datums can fit into CPU cache while the pointers to them can be 
> assigned to registers: making pivot choosing +very+ fast when done correctly.

This is more or less irrelevant given that comparing the pointers is not
the operation we need to do.

			regards, tom lane