On 2018-Jun-24, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> nbtsort.c has a comment block from the Berkeley days that reads:
>
> * This code is moderately slow (~10% slower) compared to the regular
> * btree (insertion) build code on sorted or well-clustered data. On
> * random data, however, the insertion build
nbtsort.c has a comment block from the Berkeley days that reads:
* This code is moderately slow (~10% slower) compared to the regular
* btree (insertion) build code on sorted or well-clustered data. On
* random data, however, the insertion build code is unusable -- the
* difference on a 60MB h
