[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7268?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15265927#comment-15265927
]
Dawid Weiss commented on LUCENE-7268:
-------------------------------------
bq. The javadocs for this arrays.sort method explicitly state timsort.
But do you think this normative or just a feature of Oracle's particular
implementation? I honestly don't know (not that it matters much in practice as
there are effectively no other radically different implementations of the base
package).
Tried to find the mails concerning TimSort but failed. Perhaps I confused it
with something else, but I could swear it was on the mailing list pretty
recently... I may try to look it up again once home.
> Remove ArrayUtil.timSort?
> -------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7268
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7268
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-7268_mods.patch
>
>
> Is there some workload where our timSort is better than the JDK one? Should
> we just remove ours if its slower?
> Not that its a great test, but i switched Polygon2D edge sorting (just the
> one where it says "sort the edges then build a balanced tree from them") from
> Arrays.sort to ArrayUtil.timSort and was surprised when performance was much
> slower for an enormous polygon
> (http://people.apache.org/~mikemccand/geobench/cleveland.poly.txt.gz)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
