Re^8: [OT] A measure of 'sortedness'?

to merely indicate which source buffer the resulting buffer data

I think the process of: iterating & comparing & building the bitmap during the pre-scan + iterating and decoding the bitmap in the next stage; is more expensive than: reiterating and comparing during the next stage.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

Comment on Re^8: [OT] A measure of 'sortedness'?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: [OT] A measure of 'sortedness'? by marinersk (Priest) on Mar 20, 2015 at 14:01 UTC
I accept your instinct on this as sufficiently authoritative to take at face value. Only you know what is really going on during the first phase scan. What you've revealed in this thread strongly suggests it's reordering data, not merely reading it. My adaptation of your bitmap idea for use as a run-length indicator admitted popped into my head whilst I was presuming Phase I was simply a linear read operation. It's still a fun problem, but I'm hard pressed to find anything else that might be optimized in Phase II based on metadata collected during Phase I. I have no doubts you are taking into consideration all the conventional optimizations -- not that peer review hurts, even for the experienced, but that isn't the question you asked here. :-)	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^9: [OT] A measure of 'sortedness'?
by marinersk (Priest) on Mar 20, 2015 at 14:01 UTC

I accept your instinct on this as sufficiently authoritative to take at face value. Only you know what is really going on during the first phase scan.

What you've revealed in this thread strongly suggests it's reordering data, not merely reading it. My adaptation of your bitmap idea for use as a run-length indicator admitted popped into my head whilst I was presuming Phase I was simply a linear read operation.

It's still a fun problem, but I'm hard pressed to find anything else that might be optimized in Phase II based on metadata collected during Phase I.

I have no doubts you are taking into consideration all the conventional optimizations -- not that peer review hurts, even for the experienced, but that isn't the question you asked here. :-)

[reply]