Re: Re: Which qsort is used
От | Dann Corbit |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Which qsort is used |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D425483C2C5C9F49B5B7A41F8944154757D38B@postal.corporate.connx.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Which qsort is used (Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Qingqing Zhou [mailto:zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu] > Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 10:13 PM > To: Dann Corbit > Cc: Tom Lane; Bruce Momjian; Luke Lonergan; Neil Conway; pgsql- > hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: Which qsort is used > > > > On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Dann Corbit wrote: > > > > > The benchmarks say that they (order checks) are a good idea on average > > for ordered data, random data, and partly ordered data. > > > > I interpret that in linux, 5000000 seems a divide for qsortpdq. Before > that number, it wins, after that, bsd wins more. On SunOS, qsortpdq takes > the lead till the last second -- I suspect this is due to the rand() > function: > > Linux - #define RAND_MAX 2147483647 > SunOS - #define RAND_MAX 32767 > > So in SunOS, the data actually not that scattered - so more favourate for > sorted() or reversed() check? There is a lot of variability from system to system even for the same tests. I see different results depending on whether I use GCC or Intel or MS compilers.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: