Re: Merge algorithms for large numbers of "tapes"

From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Merge algorithms for large numbers of "tapes"
Date: 2006-03-08 04:18:20
Message-ID: C0339B0C.1EBA6%llonergan@greenplum.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Yes ­ all of the current best practice external sorts use two passes. A
first to produce the runs, which results in ³S² number of ³files², then a
single merge pass across the runs. At most 1 pass across the S runs is
required to implement the merge.

- Luke

On 3/7/06 8:03 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
>> > Two passes is the state-of-the-practice on external disk sorts.
>
> There is no such thing as a fixed number of passes regardless of
> available memory and size of the data.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2006-03-08 04:47:50 Re: pg_freespacemap question
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-08 04:03:09 Re: Merge algorithms for large numbers of "tapes"