On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:29:16PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
The key to the algorithm is that it uses a trie to bin rows with common
leading prefixes together. This avoids performing redundant comparisons
between those columns later.
Sounds like a variation on the idea suggested before,
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
has anyone looked at burstsort
https://sourceforge.net/projects/burstsort
they claim that Copy-Burstsort is a sorting algorithm for strings that
is cache-efficient.
If its reason for living is cache efficiency, then I wonder
(1) how well does it work
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
has anyone looked at burstsort
https://sourceforge.net/projects/burstsort
they claim that Copy-Burstsort is a sorting algorithm for strings that
is cache-efficient. Burstsort and its variants are much faster than
Quicksort and Radixsort especially on
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The key to the algorithm is that it uses a trie to bin rows with common
leading prefixes together. This avoids performing redundant comparisons
between those columns later.
Interesting, but doesn't that make it utterly useless for sorting in
non-C
Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The key to the algorithm is that it uses a trie to bin rows with common
leading prefixes together. This avoids performing redundant comparisons
between those columns later.
Interesting, but doesn't that make it utterly useless for
