Sorting improvements in PostgreSQL 9.2: the case for micro-optimisation

Posted by martinp on Thursday August 02, 2012 @03:01AM
from the pgeoghegan.blogspot.no dept.

http://pgeoghegan.blogspot.no/2012/08/sorting-improvements-in-postgresql-92.html

( 4 comments | 41 points | on HN )

Re:Sorting improvements in PostgreSQL 9.2: the case for micr... by ralph on Thursday August 02, 2012 @04:26AM (#4327829)

Dupe of http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4327654 (thanks to non-canonical URL).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sorting improvements in PostgreSQL 9.2: the case for micr... by obtu on Thursday August 02, 2012 @06:08AM (#4328051)

This submission's title (taken from the blog post) is more interesting.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sorting improvements in PostgreSQL 9.2: the case for micr... by agwa on Thursday August 02, 2012 @07:01AM (#4328148)

Incidentally, this is the same reason why sorting in C++ using std::sort is much faster than qsort[1]. Basically, std::sort, which is templated, lets the compiler do the same specialization and inlining that this article talks about.

[1] http://radiospiel.org/sorting-in-c-3-times-faster-than-c

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sorting improvements in PostgreSQL 9.2: the case for micr... by saurik on Thursday August 02, 2012 @06:14AM (#4328063)

(Reposting the comment I had left on the other version of this article:)

PostgreSQL should really be using a radix sort for these data types, not a quick sort (however "optimized").

[ Parent | on HN ]