DSXchange

All-
I used to believe that tsort was faster than sycnsort most of the time, but from the recent posts, I'm wondering which is truly faster.

Maybe this community can come up with a heuristic for determing when to use each sort. To do this, I propose that PX users post sort statistics, and then we can analyze the stats and come up with some generalizations.

Here are the stats to post:

1. Type of Sort (sync or t):
2. Type of file in (dataset, flat file, etc):
3. Type of file out (dataset, flat file, etc):
4. Version of PX:
5. Version, flavor of UNIX:
6. Gbs scratchdisk:
7. Gbs swap space:
8. # Cpus:
9. # Partitions:
10. Amount of time it took for the sort to run:

And any other stat you think would be useful in this analysis.

Thanks,
BP

Pardon my provincialism, I'm sure that the tsort you refer to is not the ancient UNIX utility tsort ( do 'man tsort' from the command line ) which performs a topological sort on partial orderings.

So I assume that it's the Orch tsort you refer to?

Carter

Yes. If you would take a look at the OSH code generated by any jobs that have a Sort on it, or uses a stage that automatically invoke a sort, you would see the command starting with TSORT(...

However, I do not have any performance metrics with SyncSort or CoSort.

-T.J.