What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Perform a sort of sufficient size that LARGE_SORT is used. Keys-only or
keys with values will reproduce this issue.
2. Have the keys be doubles, but all of them be integers.
3. A basic example I use is the natural numbers decreasing from 1000000 to 1.
What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
I expect to see the numbers 1 through to 1000000 in increasing order. I
instead see negative numbers for the sorted keys.
What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
Version v1.0.655 (SVN r655). Windows 8 64-bit, targeting 64-bit,
compute_13,sm_13. Running on NVidia GEForce GTX 580.
Please provide any additional information below.
I have an (inelegant) workaround of multiplying all numbers by some number
(7.76345621464357) before sorting, and dividing again afterwards, for problem
sizes over 100,000. This is of course not ideal - speed, roundoff, etc :).
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
marksi...@gmail.comon 18 Feb 2013 at 9:00