| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Subject: | Re: The case for removing replacement selection sort |
| Date: | 2017-08-31 18:00:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk09sVrzMG5SOLx694wybdZFHxuCCtFVy0Ku87Eak+diA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I may submit the simple patch to remove replacement selection, if
> other contributors are receptive. Apart from everything else, the
> "incrementalism" of replacement selection works against cleverer batch
> memory management of the type I just outlined, which seems like a
> useful direction to take tuplesort in.
I attach a patch to remove replacement selection, which I'll submit to CF 1.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Remove-replacement-selection-sort.patch | text/x-patch | 33.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-31 18:13:59 | Re: Assorted leaks and weirdness in parallel execution |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-31 17:57:38 | Re: Proposal: Improve bitmap costing for lossy pages |