[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multi-threading in sort(or core-utils)

From: Bo Borgerson
Subject: Re: Multi-threading in sort(or core-utils)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:23:25 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20080505)

Paul Eggert wrote:
>>> address@hidden wrote:
>>>> I think it is good idea to make option(or by default) for sorting
>>>> in threads to increase performance on systems that might execute
>>>> more than one thread in parallel.
>>>>    Klimentov Konstantin.
> I agree.  That's been on my to-do list for years.  (It shouldn't be
> that hard, if you ignore portability hassles.  :-)

Hi Paul,

I've modified my local sort to parallelize large merges by dividing
inputs among a number of children whose outputs are merged by the parent.

This only benefits large bulk sorts indirectly by parallelizing the
merge of temp files, but it can still provide a performance improvement.

I suspect my implementation does ignore some portability hassles, but
only because I haven't encountered them yet. :)

Does this sound like a step in the right direction for sort?  If I were
to clean this up and submit it would you be willing to assess its
viability as a portable improvement?



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]