Engineering Java 7's Dual Pivot Quicksort Using MaLiJAn

Wild S, Nebel M, Reitzig R, Laube U. Engineering Java 7's Dual Pivot Quicksort Using MaLiJan. In: Proceedings of the 15th Meeting on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments, ALENEX 2013, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, January 7, 2013. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; 2013: 55--69

Analysis of Quickselect under Yaroslavskiy's Dual-Pivoting Algorithm

There is excitement within the algorithms community about a new partitioning method introduced by Yaroslavskiy. This algorithm renders Quicksort slightly faster than the case when it runs under classic partitioning methods. We show that this improved performance in Quicksort is not sustained in Quickselect; a variant of Quicksort for finding order statistics. We investigate the number of comparisons made by Quickselect to find a key with a randomly selected rank under Yaroslavskiy's algorithm. This grand averaging is a smoothing operator over all individual distributions for specific fixed order statistics. We give the exact grand average. The grand distribution of the number of comparison (when suitably scaled) is given as the fixed-point solution of a distributional equation of a contraction in the Zolotarev metric space. Our investigation shows that Quickselect under older partitioning methods slightly outperforms Quickselect under Yaroslavskiy's algorithm, for an order statistic of a random rank. Similar results are obtained for extremal order statistics, where again we find the exact average, and the distribution for the number of comparisons (when suitably scaled). Both limiting distributions are of perpetuities (a sum of products of independent mixed continuous random variables).Comment: full version with appendices; otherwise identical to Algorithmica versio

Average Case and Distributional Analysis of Dual-Pivot Quicksort

In 2009, Oracle replaced the long-serving sorting algorithm in its Java 7 runtime library by a new dual-pivot Quicksort variant due to Vladimir Yaroslavskiy. The decision was based on the strikingly good performance of Yaroslavskiy's implementation in running time experiments. At that time, no precise investigations of the algorithm were available to explain its superior performance—on the contrary: previous theoretical studies of other dual-pivot Quicksort variants even discouraged the use of two pivots. In 2012, two of the authors gave an average case analysis of a simplified version of Yaroslavskiy's algorithm, proving that savings in the number of comparisons are possible. However, Yaroslavskiy's algorithm needs more swaps, which renders the analysis inconclusive. To force the issue, we herein extend our analysis to the fully detailed style of Knuth: we determine the exact number of executed Java Bytecode instructions. Surprisingly, Yaroslavskiy's algorithm needs sightly more Bytecode instructions than a simple implementation of classic Quicksort—contradicting observed running times. As in Oracle's library implementation, we incorporate the use of Insertionsort on small subproblems and show that it indeed speeds up Yaroslavskiy's Quicksort in terms of Bytecodes; but even with optimal Insertionsort thresholds, the new Quicksort variant needs slightly more Bytecode instructions on average. Finally, we show that the (suitably normalized) costs of Yaroslavskiy's algorithm converge to a random variable whose distribution is characterized by a fixed-point equation. From that, we compute variances of costs and show that for large n, costs are concentrated around their mean

Pivot Sampling in Dual-Pivot Quicksort

The new dual-pivot Quicksort by Vladimir Yaroslavskiy - used in Oracle's Java runtime library since version 7 - features intriguing asymmetries in its behavior. They were shown to cause a basic variant of this algorithm to use less comparisons than classic single-pivot Quicksort implementations. In this paper, we extend the analysis to the case where the two pivots are chosen as fixed order statistics of a random sample and give the precise leading term of the average number of comparisons, swaps and executed Java Bytecode instructions. It turns out that - unlike for classic Quicksort, where it is optimal to choose the pivot as median of the sample - the asymmetries in Yaroslavskiy's algorithm render pivots with a systematic skew more efficient than the symmetric choice. Moreover, the optimal skew heavily depends on the employed cost measure; most strikingly, abstract costs like the number of swaps and comparisons yield a very different result than counting Java Bytecode instructions, which can be assumed most closely related to actual running time.Comment: presented at AofA 2014 (http://www.aofa14.upmc.fr/