Re: A qsort template

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 6:10 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:

> One thing I'm wondering about is whether it's worth having stuff to
> support future experimentation like ST_SORT_SMALL_THRESHOLD and
> ST_COMPARE_RET_TYPE in the tree, or whether we should pare it back to
> the minimal changes that definitely produce results.  I think I'd like
> to keep those changes: even if it may be some time, possibly an
> infinite amount, before we figure out how to tune the thresholds
> profitably, giving them names instead of using magic numbers seems
> like progress.

I suspect if we experiment on two extremes of type "heaviness" (accessing and comparing trivial or not), such as uint32 and tuplesort, we'll have a pretty good idea what the parameters should be, if anything different. I'll do some testing along those lines.

(BTW, I just realized I lied and sent a .patch file after all, oops)

--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com