"Brian Hurt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 3) It's possible to perform the sort lazily. You have the initial O(N) pass > over the list, but then each block is only O(log N) cost. If it's likely that > only the first part of the result is needed, then much of the work can be > avoided.
Now that's a *fascinating* idea. I'm having trouble coming up with a really killer use case for it since the bounded heap sort takes care of many cases where it would seem to apply. But it seems rally promising. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
