neoremind commented on pull request #91:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/91#issuecomment-824891023
I use `TimSort` instead of `InPlaceMergeSorter`, expect it to be faster, but
it turns out to be slower. @jpountz would you check my latest commit to see if
I implement Tim Sort correctly?
Below is the latest benchmark of `MSBRadixSort` with stable
reorder(isDocIdIncremental = N) and `StableMSBRadixSort` (isDocIdIncremental =
Y)
```
-------------------------------------------------
| bytesPerDim | isDocIdIncremental | avg time(us) |
-------------------------------------------------
| 1 | N | 995541.5 |
| 1 | Y | 60399.2 |
| 2 | N | 951085.9 |
| 2 | Y | 322054.3 |
| 3 | N | 1333992.5 |
| 3 | Y | 756951.4 |
| 4 | N | 1340422.4 |
| 4 | Y | 1528955.5 |
| 8 | N | 1323878.8 |
| 8 | Y | 1494004.5 |
| 16 | N | 1305548.1 |
| 16 | Y | 1480329.4 |
| 32 | N | 1326447.5 |
| 32 | Y | 1589089.8 |
-------------------------------------------------
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
