in puttuple_common(), the transition from an internal to external sort is
performed at the bottom of the TSS_INITIAL case in the main switch
statement.
The transition? Do we internal sort somewhere else and then external sort
here in tuplesort.c?
The function dumptuples() heapifies the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The function dumptuples() heapifies the in-core tuples (divides the in-core
tuples into initial runs and then advances the state to TSS_BUILDRUNS).
Cannot see where dumptuples() advances the state to TSS_BUILDRUNS.
I expected something like
state-status =
Hi to all.
It seems a previous mail of mine with following body hasn't been sent.
Sorry for possibly getting it twice.
Actually I have now modified that body, so it's worth to read it once again.
Thanks for your attention.
Regards.
PREVIOUS MAIL--
Well,
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 09:25 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Others optimizations, for example, can be done with the virtual
concatenation technique:
storing a cache of couples (first_element,last_element) for each created
run. This
could be useful in case we can find 2 couples
] Replacement Selection
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 09:25 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Others optimizations, for example, can be done with the virtual
concatenation technique:
storing a cache of couples (first_element,last_element) for each created
run. This
could be useful in case we can find 2 couples
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 17:49 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any comment about Two Ways Replacement Selection (two heaps instead of just
one) ?
It might allow dynamic heap size management more easily than with a
single heap.
If you really think it will be better, try it. You'll learn loads,
Hi to all.
I'm new. I'd like to integrate my code into PostgreSQL. It's the
implementation of some refinements of Replacement Selection algorithm used
for External Sorting.
I have got some issue and preferibly I'd like to be supported by some
developers that have something to do with it.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm new. I'd like to integrate my code into PostgreSQL. It's the
implementation of some refinements of Replacement Selection algorithm
used for External Sorting.
I have got some issue and preferibly I'd like to be supported by some
developers that have something to do
for your attention.
--
From: Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replacement Selection
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm new. I'd like
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your support.
I downloaded the source code of the last stable version of PostgreSQL.
Where can I find the part related to the External Sorting algorithm
(supposed to be Replacement Selection)?
I mean, which is the file to be studied and/or modified
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I downloaded the source code of the last stable version of PostgreSQL.
Where can I find the part related to the External Sorting algorithm
(supposed to be Replacement Selection)?
I mean, which is the file to be studied and/or modified and/or substituted?
In
, November 26, 2007 2:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replacement Selection
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I downloaded the source code of the last stable version of PostgreSQL.
Where can I find the part related to the External Sorting algorithm
(supposed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately I'm lost into the code... any good soul helping me to
understand what should be the precise part to be modified?
You haven't given any details on what you're trying to do. What are you
trying to do?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok guys!
Thanks for your help.
Unfortunately I'm lost into the code... any good soul helping me to
understand what should be the precise part to be modified?
I think you should print the file and read it several times until you
understand what's going on. Then you
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately I'm lost into the code... any good soul helping me to
understand what should be the precise part to be modified?
I think you should print the file and read it several times until you
understand what's going on.
PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 6:00 PM
To: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replacement Selection
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately I'm lost into the code... any good soul
-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replacement Selection
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately I'm lost into the code... any good soul helping me to
understand what should be the precise part to be modified?
You haven't given any details on what you're trying to do. What are you
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3) Start run generation. As for this phase, I see PostgreSQL code (as Knuth
algorithm) marks elements belonging to runs in otder to know which run they
belong to and to know when the current heap has finished building the
current run. I don't memorize this kind of
@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replacement Selection
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3) Start run generation. As for this phase, I see PostgreSQL code (as
Knuth
algorithm) marks elements belonging to runs in otder to know which run
they
belong to and to know when the current heap has finished
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also implemented
Replacement Selection (RS) so if I'm able to integrate my RS I hope I
would be able to integrate the others too.
The existing code implements RS. Tom asked you to describe what improvements
you hope to make; I'm confident that he already
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyway, even in my RS implementation a longer run is created. The first M
initialization elements will surely form part of the current run. M is the
memory size so at least a run sized M will be created. After initialization,
the elements are not suddenly output,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AFAICS that produces runs that are *exactly* the same length as Knuth's
method --- you're just using a different technique for detecting when
the run is over, to wit record is not in heap vs record is in heap
but with a higher run number. I guess you would
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I guess you would save some comparisons
while the heap is shrinking, but it's not at all clear that you'd save
more than what it will cost you to re-heapify all the dead records once
the run is over.
This sounded
23 matches
Mail list logo
