Subject: Re: [boost] [SORT] Parallel Algorithms
From: Francisco JosÃ© Tapia (fjtapia_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-13 12:42:51
This Christmas I had been working hard. I developed a new version of the
merge sort about 10-15% faster than the previous, using an additional
memory only Â½ of the memory used by the data. The GCC and TBB algorithms
use an additional memory as the size of the data.
This version is exception safe. If an exception occurs due to the
algorithm ( only throw exceptions in the allocation and deallocation of the
additional memory), the integrity of the data is guarantee. You have all
the original data (unordered in the allocation, and ordered in the
I examined the TBB version and the secret is the sample sort algorithm.
The version of TBB is provisional and it's not exception safe. I am working
in the design of a new version of this algorithm exception safe. The actual
version of the parallel stable algorithm is about 20% slower than the TBB
version in the worse case, but when the size of the elements grows, the
indirect version is faster than all the others, with 64 bytes, is around
10% faster than the best TBB version, with 128 bytes , the best version of
TBB is around a 90% slower, and with 256 is 240% slower.
An additional advantage of the indirect sort is they use additional memory
for the pointers, not for the data, and the additional memory is around a
10% of the used by the data.
I hope to have the new algorithm in two weeks, more or less. Then I will
put all in the name space boost::sort, and design all the test and
benchmarks, as commented in the previous message.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk