Horton

Re: Memory usage during sorting

Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>

View thread
From: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-03-20T11:44:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Improve performance of our private version of qsort. Per recent testing,

  2. Further performance improvements in sorting: reduce number of comparisons

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> That was a long time ago, of course, but I have some vague recollection
> that keeping next-run tuples in the current heap achieves a net savings
> in the total number of comparisons needed to heapify both runs.

Offhand I wonder if this is all because we don't have the O(n) heapify
implemented.

-- 
greg