[ODE] Sweep-and-Prune space for ODE

[Brian Marshall]

A good place to look would be here:

http://www.codercorner.com/RadixSortRevisited.htm

A page on it by Pierre Terdiman - the guy who wrote Opcode where the sort
has been borrowed from.

One thing I don't think that article covers is caching behaviour. On modern
computers caching behaviour can dominate sorting performance - a sort with a
better algorithm in theory can be beaten by one with better cache behaviour
depending on the data set.

Still doesn't mean people shouldn't test it - see what works for your data.
I'd have thought the potentially bigger issue would be floats vrs doubles,
rather than IEEE float or not. After all some people will run ODE in double
precision - so a version for doubles could be needed too.

-Brian. 

-----Original Message-----
From: ode-bounces at q12.org [mailto:ode-bounces at q12.org] On Behalf Of Graham
Fyffe
Sent: 25 November 2004 14:51
To: Aras Pranckevicius
Cc: ode
Subject: Re: [ODE] Sweep-and-Prune space for ODE

Sorry guys, but I just *have* to ask.  Has anybody done any conclusive
benchmarks on the radix sorting code?  I remember a while back I did some
pretty extensive tests and I found that radix sorting was 2x as fast as
std::sort for integers, but the floating point version (that handled signs)
was 2.5x slower!  This was pretty consistent for input sizes from 10,000 to
100,000,000.  Was I just using a crappy radix sort implementaiton?

- Graham