[ruby-core:49790] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6256] Slightly improve ruby_qsort performance

Issue #6256 has been updated by MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet).

Target version changed from 2.0.0 to next minor

It's a tiny bit faster. But it should be noticeably faster. I need to get into the details of the current qsort implementation and do some tests/calculations in order to really know where to optimize appropriately. OK if I bump to "next minor"? I'd prefer to do some more analysis.
----------------------------------------
Feature #6256: Slightly improve ruby_qsort performance
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6256#change-33371

Author: MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Low
Assignee: MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


Hi all,

I think I may have found a way to slightly improve the performance of ruby_qsort. 
Quicksort running time is slightly decreased if the recursion depth (or in our 
case, rather iteration depth) is bounded by leaving sub problems larger than or 
equal to some cutoff bound k untouched and running Insertion Sort on these small 
sub problems to finalize the sorting. 

I experimented with this, but to no avail, only marginal improvements if any. Then 
I remembered that instead of running Insertion Sort on each sub problem, it is 
equivalent in terms of running time to run one single Insertion Sort on the whole 
nearly sorted array as a final step. And in practice, this turns out to run faster 
than without the optimization. In my tests, execution time dropped to about 95% on 
average with an optimal cutoff (64-bit Fedora 15) [1].

Now this ain't the world - but it is faster, and I could very well imagine that there 
is still room for improving my code. In my tests, the optimal cutoff seems to be ~13 
for Integers and ~8 for Strings and Symbols. I imagine the more costly the comparisons, 
the lower will be the optimal cutoff. I've tested only on 64 Bit yet, but I will do so 
for 32 Bit, too.

If it turns out that this runs faster regardless of the architecture in use, with an
optimal cutoff yet to be determined, do you think this would be a useful addition?

I have attached a C extension for testing and discussing, it's mostly a one-to-one copy of
the code in util.c. I just added mmassign and insertion_sort plus the few lines that respect
the cutoff in rqsort (had to rename it, otherwise it would collide with the real "ruby_qsort").

-Martin

[1] https://github.com/emboss/hybridsort/blob/master/hybrid-sort-results


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/