| From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "david(at)lang(dot)hm" <david(at)lang(dot)hm>, Steve Clark <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Linux: more cores = less concurrency. |
| Date: | 2011-04-14 20:19:17 |
| Message-ID: | BANLkTinJZQ+uT1LADUD-BHYciuWX6JWNvg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> wrote:
> Huge Pages helps caches.
> Dual-Pivot quicksort is more cache friendly and is _always_ equal to or
> faster than traditional quicksort (its a provably improved algorithm).
If you want a cache-friendly sorting algorithm, you need mergesort.
I don't know any algorithm as friendly to caches as mergesort.
Quicksort could be better only when the sorting buffer is guaranteed
to fit on the CPU's cache, and that's usually just a few 4kb pages.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Carey | 2011-04-14 22:42:46 | Re: Linux: more cores = less concurrency. |
| Previous Message | Scott Carey | 2011-04-14 20:05:36 | Re: Linux: more cores = less concurrency. |