Re: PG qsort vs. Solaris

On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 15:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I propose that we do the following:
> 
> 1. Switch to using port/qsort.c all the time.
> 2. Add a "qsort_arg" function that is identical to qsort except it also
>    passes a void pointer through to the comparison function.  This will
>    allow us to get rid of the non-reentrant static variable and extra
>    level of function call in tuplesort.c.
> 3. Insert a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() call as was requested back in July.
>    With glibc out of the way, there's no longer a reason to fear memory
>    leakage from cancelling a sort.

+1 from me.

I can implement this (for 8.3, naturally), unless you'd prefer to do it
yourself.

-Neil