On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:44 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> writes:
> > On 7/15/19 11:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> David Rowley <david.rowley@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