On Sun, 21 Sep 2025 19:47:14 GMT, Vladimir Yaroslavskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
> The goal of the PR is to improve both, sequential and parallel, sorting of > primitives. > > **The main achievements** > > - introduced Radix in parallel sorting which shows several times boost of > performance and has linear complexity instead of n*ln(n) > - improved mixed insertion sort (makes whole sorting faster) > - improved merging sort for almost sorted data > - optimized parallel sorting > - improved step for pivot candidates and pivot partitioning > - suggested better buffer allocation: if no memory, it is switched to > in-place sorting with no OutOfMemoryError > - minor javadoc and comment changes > > - extended existing tests > - added tests for radix sort, heap sort, insertion sort > - added benchmarking JMH tests > - improved test coverage > > **The summary of benchmarking:** > > **Sequential sorting (Arrays.sort)** > > byte: up to 50% faster > char: 4-7 times faster > short: 2-6 times faster > int: 1.2-5 times faster > long: 1.2-5 times faster > float: 1.2-5 times faster > double: 1.2-4 times faster > > **Parallel sorting (Arrays.parallelSort)** > > int: 1.2-9 times faster > long: 1.2-9 times faster > float: 1.2-4 times faster > double: 1.2-4 times faster > > **AVX512 support** > > Vamsi Parasa suggested faster sort routines by taking advantage of AVX512 > instructions, see https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/14227, sources of > sorting were modified. Therefore, I performed benchmarking of the final > version (which includes optimizations by Vamsi Parasa and optimizations from > my side) on a server with CPUs supported AVX512 instructions, no regression > of performance was found, see detailed benchmarking results. > > I'm going on previous PRs https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/3938 and > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13568 Do you have any sense on how if parallelSort is widely used? There is a lot of code and complexity in this proposal and I think important to understand if it is worth it. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27411#issuecomment-3317543727
