On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:44 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> writes: > > On 7/15/19 11:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >>> The only thoughts I have so far here are that it's a shame that the > >>> function got called list_qsort() and not just list_sort(). > > > I agree with David -- list_sort() is better. I don't think "sort" is > > such a common stem that searching is a big issue, especially with modern > > code indexing tools. > > OK, I'm outvoted, will do it that way.
I cast my vote in the other direction i.e. for sticking with qsort. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
