On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 05:49:06PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> There doesn't seem to have been any progress since this email.
Indeed, none. I am marking it as returned with feedback... The patch
has rotten quite some time ago as well.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 03/04/2018 04:57 AM, Yura Sokolov wrote:
BTW, I have small change to templated version that improves sorting of
random tuples a bit (1-1.5%). Will post it a bit later with test.
There doesn't seem to have been any progress since this email.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
01.03.2018 22:22, Andres Freund пишет:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-02-25 21:39:46 +0300, Yura Sokolov wrote:
>>> If that's the case then does it really make sense to make this change..?
>>
>> I don't think it is really necessary to implement generic version
>> through templated.
>
> Why?
It is better to r
Hi,
On 2018-02-25 21:39:46 +0300, Yura Sokolov wrote:
> > If that's the case then does it really make sense to make this change..?
>
> I don't think it is really necessary to implement generic version
> through templated.
Why?
> Updated numbers are (same benchmark on same notebook, but with new
23.01.2018 06:34, Stephen Frost пишет:
> Greetings,
>
> * Юрий Соколов (funny.fal...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this afte
Greetings,
* Юрий Соколов (funny.fal...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
> >> the change? These should be just specia
hi,
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
>> the change? These should be just specializations of the template version
>> imo.
"generic" version o
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
>> the change? These should be just specializations of the template version
>> imo.
>
> I also wonder why reg
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
> the change? These should be just specializations of the template version
> imo.
I also wonder why regression test output has changed. Wasn't this
supposed to be a mec
Hi,
On 2017-11-28 23:30:53 +0300, Юрий Соколов wrote:
> index 1a8ee08c8b..607ed6a781 100644
> --- a/src/port/qsort.c
> +++ b/src/port/qsort.c
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> * in favor of a simple check for presorted input.
> * Take care to recurse on the smaller partition, to bound stack usage.
>
2017-11-28 11:49 GMT+03:00 Peter Geoghegan :
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Юрий Соколов
wrote:
> > Attached patched replaces gen_qsort_tuple.pl with qsort_template.h -
generic
> > qsort template header.
> > Some tests do not specify exact order (ie their output depends on order
of
> > equa
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Юрий Соколов wrote:
> Attached patched replaces gen_qsort_tuple.pl with qsort_template.h - generic
> qsort template header.
> Some tests do not specify exact order (ie their output depends on order of
> equal elements). Such tests output wes fixed.
>
> I didn't ap
2017-11-08 23:44 GMT+03:00 Юрий Соколов :
>
> 2017-11-08 20:02 GMT+03:00 Tom Lane :
> >
> > Claudio Freire writes:
> > > What's perhaps not clear is whether there are better ideas. Like
> > > rebuilding the page as Tom proposes, which doesn't seem like a bad
> > > idea. Bucket sort already is O(by
13 matches
Mail list logo
