Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)
Date: 2006-02-16 01:21:33
Message-ID: 21615.1140052893@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> writes:
> How are we choosing our pivots?

See qsort.c: it looks like median of nine equally spaced inputs (ie,
the 1/8th points of the initial input array, plus the end points),
implemented as two rounds of median-of-three choices. With half of the
data inputs zero, it's not too improbable for two out of the three
samples to be zeroes in which case I think the med3 result will be zero
--- so choosing a pivot of zero is much more probable than one would
like, and doing so in many levels of recursion causes the problem.

I think. I'm not too sure if the code isn't just being sloppy about the
case where many data values are equal to the pivot --- there's a special
case there to switch to insertion sort, and maybe that's getting invoked
too soon. It'd be useful to get a line-level profile of the behavior of
this code in the slow cases...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-02-16 01:36:01 Generating config stuff from single source
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-02-16 00:59:44 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2006-02-16 01:37:58 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-02-16 00:59:44 Re: qsort again (was Re: [PERFORM] Strange Create Index behaviour)