algorithm - Mergesort implementation is slow

Question

I'am doing a report about different sorting algorithms in C++. What baffles me is that my mergesort seems to be slower than heapsort in both of the languages. What I've seen is that heapsort is supposed to be slower.

My mergesort sorts an unsorted array with size 100000 at a speed of 19.8 ms meanwhile heapsort sorts it at 9.7 ms. The code for my mergesort function in C++ is as follows:

void merge(int *array, int low, int mid, int high) {
    int i, j, k;
    int lowLength = mid - low + 1;
    int highLength = high - mid;

    int *lowArray = new int[lowLength];
    int *highArray = new int[highLength];

    for (i = 0; i < lowLength; i++)
        lowArray[i] = array[low + i];
    for (j = 0; j < highLength; j++)
        highArray[j] = array[mid + 1 + j];

    i = 0; 
    j = 0; 
    k = low; 
    while (i < lowLength && j < highLength) {
        if (lowArray[i] <= highArray[j]) {
            array[k] = lowArray[i];
            i++;
        } else {
            array[k] = highArray[j];
            j++;
        }
        k++;
    }

    while (i < lowLength) {
        array[k] = lowArray[i];
        i++;
        k++;
    }

    while (j < highLength) {
        array[k] = highArray[j];
        j++;
        k++;
    }
}

void mergeSort(int *array, int low, int high) {
    if (low < high) {
        int mid = low + (high - low) / 2;

        mergeSort(array, low, mid);
        mergeSort(array, mid + 1, high);

        merge(array, low, mid, high);
    }
}

Answer 1

The example merge sort is doing allocation and copying of data in merge(), and both can be eliminated with a more efficient merge sort. A single allocation for the temp array can be done in a helper / entry function, and the copy is avoided by changing the direction of merge depending on level of recursion either by using two mutually recursive functions (as in example below) or with a boolean parameter.

Here is an example of a C++ top down merge sort that is reasonably optimized. A bottom up merge sort would be slightly faster, and on a system with 16 registers, a 4 way bottom merge sort a bit faster still, about as fast or faster than quick sort.

// prototypes
void TopDownSplitMergeAtoA(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t ee);
void TopDownSplitMergeAtoB(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t ee);
void TopDownMerge(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t rr, size_t ee);

void MergeSort(int a[], size_t n)       // entry function
{
    if(n < 2)                           // if size < 2 return
        return;
    int *b = new int[n];
    TopDownSplitMergeAtoA(a, b, 0, n);
    delete[] b;
}

void TopDownSplitMergeAtoA(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t ee)
{
    if((ee - ll) == 1)                  // if size == 1 return
        return;
    size_t rr = (ll + ee)>>1;           // midpoint, start of right half
    TopDownSplitMergeAtoB(a, b, ll, rr);
    TopDownSplitMergeAtoB(a, b, rr, ee);
    TopDownMerge(b, a, ll, rr, ee);     // merge b to a
}

void TopDownSplitMergeAtoB(int a[], int b[], size_t ll, size_t ee)
{
    if((ee - ll) == 1){                 // if size == 1 copy a to b
        b[ll] = a[ll];
        return;
    }
    size_t rr = (ll + ee)>>1;           // midpoint, start of right half
    TopDownSplitMergeAtoA(a, b, ll, rr);
    TopDownSplitMergeAtoA(a, b, rr, ee);
    TopDownMerge(a, b, ll, rr, ee);     // merge a to b
}

void TopDownMerge(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
        }
    }
}