Optimized merge sort faster than quicksort
http://jsperf.com/optimized-mergesort-versus-quicksort
Why does this half buffer merge sort work as fast as quicksort?
QuickSort is:
- In-Place although it takes up
log(n)recursions (stack space) - Cache-Friendly
This half buffer merge sort:
- Uses an
n/2Buffer to do merges. - Uses
log(n)recursions. - Makes fewer comparisons.
My question is, why is the half buffer merge sort matching the speed of QuickSort in this scenario? Plus, is there anything I'm doing wrong to the quickSort that makes it slower?
function partition(a, i, j) {
var p = i + Math.floor((j - i) / 2);
var left = i + 1;
var right = j;
swap(a, i, p);
var pivot = a[i];
while (left <= right) {
while (builtinLessThan(a[left], pivot)) {
++left;
}
while (builtinLessThan(pivot, a[right])) {
--right;
}
if (left <= right) {
swap(a, left, right);
++left;
--right;
}
}
swap(a, i, right);
return right;
};
function quickSort(a, i, j) {
var p = partition(a, i, j);
if ((p) - i > j - p) {
if (i < p - 1) {
quickSort(a, i, p - 1);
}
if (p + 1 < j) {
quickSort(a, p + 1, j);
}
} else {
if (p + 1 < j) {
quickSort(a, p + 1, j);
} if (i < p - 1) {
quickSort(a, i, p - 1);
}
}
};
Merge sort does fewer compares, but more moves than quick sort. Having to call a function to do the compares increases the overhead for compares, which makes quick sort slower. All those if statements in the example quick sort is also slowing it down. If the compare and swap are done inline, then quick sort should be a bit faster if sorting an array of pseudo random integers.
If running on a processor with 16 registers, such a PC in 64 bit mode, then 4 way merge sort using a bunch of pointers that end up in registers is about as fast as quick sort. A 2 way merge sort averages 1 compare for each element moved, while a 4 way merge sort averages 3 compares for each element moved, but only takes 1/2 the number of passes, so the number of basic operations is the same, but the compares are a bit more cache friendly, making the 4 way merge sort about 15% faster, about the same as quick sort.
I'm not familiar with java script, so I'm converting the examples to C++.
Using a converted version of the java script merge sort, it takes about 2.4 seconds to sort 16 million pseudo random 32 bit integers. The example quick sort shown below takes about 1.4 seconds, and the example bottom up merge shown below sort about 1.6 seconds. As mentioned, a 4 way merge using a bunch of pointers (or indices) on a processor with 16 registers would also take about 1.4 seconds.
C++ quick sort example:
void QuickSort(int a[], int lo, int hi) {
int i = lo, j = hi;
int pivot = a[(lo + hi) / 2];
int t;
while (i <= j) { // partition
while (a[i] < pivot)
i++;
while (a[j] > pivot)
j--;
if (i <= j) {
t = a[i]
a[i] = a[j];
a[j] = t;
i++;
j--;
}
}
if (lo < j) // recurse
QuickSort(a, lo, j);
if (i < hi)
QuickSort(a, i, hi);
}
C++ bottom up merge sort example:
void BottomUpMergeSort(int a[], int b[], size_t n)
{
size_t s = 1; // run size
if(GetPassCount(n) & 1){ // if odd number of passes
for(s = 1; s < n; s += 2) // swap in place for 1st pass
if(a[s] < a[s-1])
std::swap(a[s], a[s-1]);
s = 2;
}
while(s < n){ // while not done
size_t ee = 0; // reset end index
while(ee < n){ // merge pairs of runs
size_t ll = ee; // ll = start of left run
size_t rr = ll+s; // rr = start of right run
if(rr >= n){ // if only left run
rr = n;
BottomUpCopy(a, b, ll, rr); // copy left run
break; // end of pass
}
ee = rr+s; // ee = end of right run
if(ee > n)
ee = n;
BottomUpMerge(a, b, ll, rr, ee);
}
std::swap(a, b); // swap a and b
s <<= 1; // double the run size
}
}
void BottomUpMerge(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t rr, size_t ee)
{
size_t o = ll; // b[] index
size_t l = ll; // a[] left index
size_t r = rr; // a[] right index
while(1){ // merge data
if(a[l] <= a[r]){ // if a[l] <= a[r]
b[o++] = a[l++]; // copy a[l]
if(l < rr) // if not end of left run
continue; // continue (back to while)
while(r < ee) // else copy rest of right run
b[o++] = a[r++];
break; // and return
} else { // else a[l] > a[r]
b[o++] = a[r++]; // copy a[r]
if(r < ee) // if not end of right run
continue; // continue (back to while)
while(l < rr) // else copy rest of left run
b[o++] = a[l++];
break; // and return
}
}
}
void BottomUpCopy(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t rr)
{
while(ll < rr){ // copy left run
b[ll] = a[ll];
ll++;
}
}
size_t GetPassCount(size_t n) // return # passes
{
size_t i = 0;
for(size_t s = 1; s < n; s <<= 1)
i += 1;
return(i);
}
C++ example of 4 way merge sort using pointers (goto's used to save code space, it's old code). It starts off doing 4 way merge, then when the end of a run is reached, it switches to 3 way merge, then 2 way merge, then a copy of what's left of the remaining run. This is similar to algorithms used for external sorts, but external sort logic is more generalized and often handles up to 16 way merges.
int * BottomUpMergeSort(int a[], int b[], size_t n)
{
int *p0r; // ptr to run 0
int *p0e; // ptr to end run 0
int *p1r; // ptr to run 1
int *p1e; // ptr to end run 1
int *p2r; // ptr to run 2
int *p2e; // ptr to end run 2
int *p3r; // ptr to run 3
int *p3e; // ptr to end run 3
int *pax; // ptr to set of runs in a
int *pbx; // ptr for merged output to b
size_t rsz = 1; // run size
if(n < 2)
return a;
if(n == 2){
if(a[0] > a[1])std::swap(a[0],a[1]);
return a;
}
if(n == 3){
if(a[0] > a[2])std::swap(a[0],a[2]);
if(a[0] > a[1])std::swap(a[0],a[1]);
if(a[1] > a[2])std::swap(a[1],a[2]);
return a;
}
while(rsz < n){
pbx = &b[0];
pax = &a[0];
while(pax < &a[n]){
p0e = rsz + (p0r = pax);
if(p0e >= &a[n]){
p0e = &a[n];
goto cpy10;}
p1e = rsz + (p1r = p0e);
if(p1e >= &a[n]){
p1e = &a[n];
goto mrg201;}
p2e = rsz + (p2r = p1e);
if(p2e >= &a[n]){
p2e = &a[n];
goto mrg3012;}
p3e = rsz + (p3r = p2e);
if(p3e >= &a[n])
p3e = &a[n];
// 4 way merge
while(1){
if(*p0r <= *p1r){
if(*p2r <= *p3r){
if(*p0r <= *p2r){
mrg40: *pbx++ = *p0r++; // run 0 smallest
if(p0r < p0e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg3123; // merge 1,2,3
} else {
mrg42: *pbx++ = *p2r++; // run 2 smallest
if(p2r < p2e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg3013; // merge 0,1,3
}
} else {
if(*p0r <= *p3r){
goto mrg40; // run 0 smallext
} else {
mrg43: *pbx++ = *p3r++; // run 3 smallest
if(p3r < p3e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg3012; // merge 0,1,2
}
}
} else {
if(*p2r <= *p3r){
if(*p1r <= *p2r){
mrg41: *pbx++ = *p1r++; // run 1 smallest
if(p1r < p1e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg3023; // merge 0,2,3
} else {
goto mrg42; // run 2 smallest
}
} else {
if(*p1r <= *p3r){
goto mrg41; // run 1 smallest
} else {
goto mrg43; // run 3 smallest
}
}
}
}
// 3 way merge
mrg3123: p0r = p1r;
p0e = p1e;
mrg3023: p1r = p2r;
p1e = p2e;
mrg3013: p2r = p3r;
p2e = p3e;
mrg3012: while(1){
if(*p0r <= *p1r){
if(*p0r <= *p2r){
*pbx++ = *p0r++; // run 0 smallest
if(p0r < p0e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg212; // merge 1,2
} else {
mrg32: *pbx++ = *p2r++; // run 2 smallest
if(p2r < p2e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg201; // merge 0,1
}
} else {
if(*p1r <= *p2r){
*pbx++ = *p1r++; // run 1 smallest
if(p1r < p1e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto mrg202; // merge 0,2
} else {
goto mrg32; // run 2 smallest
}
}
}
// 2 way merge
mrg212: p0r = p1r;
p0e = p1e;
mrg202: p1r = p2r;
p1e = p2e;
mrg201: while(1){
if(*p0r <= *p1r){
*pbx++ = *p0r++; // run 0 smallest
if(p0r < p0e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto cpy11;
} else {
*pbx++ = *p1r++; // run 1 smallest
if(p1r < p1e) // if not end run continue
continue;
goto cpy10;
}
}
// 1 way copy
cpy11: p0r = p1r;
p0e = p1e;
cpy10: while (1) {
*pbx++ = *p0r++; // copy element
if (p0r < p0e) // if not end of run continue
continue;
break;
}
pax += rsz << 2; // setup for next set of runs
}
std::swap(a, b); // swap ptrs
rsz <<= 2; // quadruple run size
}
return a; // return sorted array
}