Tom,
> BTW, as for your original question about performance, the current
> external sort algorithm is mainly designed to conserve disk space,
> not to be as fast as possible. ÂIt could probably be a good bit faster
> if we didn't mind taking twice as much space (mainly because the
> physical disk
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 10:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Could anybody comment on whether the current tests appropriately cover
> > the correctness of the external sorting algorithms?
>
> It's highly unlikely that the regression tests stress external sorts
>
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could anybody comment on whether the current tests appropriately cover
> the correctness of the external sorting algorithms?
It's highly unlikely that the regression tests stress external sorts
much, or that anyone would hold still for making them run long
