Re: Sort Refinement
От | Sam Mason |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sort Refinement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20080320213400.GB26166@frubble.xen.chris-lamb.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Sort Refinement (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sort Refinement
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:17:22PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > Currently, our sort algorithm assumes that its input is unsorted. So if > your data is sorted on (a) and you would like it to be sorted on (a,b) > then we need to perform the full sort of (a,b). > > For small sorts this doesn't matter much. For larger sorts the heap sort > algorithm will typically result in just a single run being written to > disk which must then be read back in. Number of I/Os required is twice > the total volume of data to be sorted. > > If we assume we use heap sort, then if we *know* that the data is > presorted on (a) then we should be able to emit tuples directly that the > value of (a) changes and keep emitting them until the heap is empty, > since they will exit the heap in (a,b) order. We also have stats to help decide when this will be a win. For example if "a" has a small range (i.e. a boolean) and "b" has a large range (i.e. some sequence) then this probably isn't going to be a win and you're better off using the existing infrastructure. If it's the other way around then this is going to be a big win. Sam
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: