From: | Stepan Neretin <sncfmgg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Sort functions with specialized comparators |
Date: | 2024-06-07 18:50:02 |
Message-ID: | CAN-sa+DuG9sknnnhpf2nMqHp3ghp8xOY5pyn6VyUAV8EN0giCg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello all.
I am interested in the proposed patch and would like to propose some
additional changes that would complement it. My changes would introduce
similar optimizations when working with a list of integers or object
identifiers. Additionally, my patch includes an extension for benchmarking,
which shows an average speedup of 30-40%.
postgres=# SELECT bench_oid_sort(1000000);
bench_oid_sort
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time taken by list_sort: 116990848 ns, Time taken by list_oid_sort:
80446640 ns, Percentage difference: 31.24%
(1 row)
postgres=# SELECT bench_int_sort(1000000);
bench_int_sort
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time taken by list_sort: 118168506 ns, Time taken by list_int_sort:
80523373 ns, Percentage difference: 31.86%
(1 row)
What do you think about these changes?
Best regards, Stepan Neretin.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 11:08 PM Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> In a thread about sorting comparators[0] Andres noted that we have
> infrastructure to help compiler optimize sorting. PFA attached PoC
> implementation. I've checked that it indeed works on the benchmark from
> that thread.
>
> postgres=# CREATE TABLE arrays_to_sort AS
> SELECT array_shuffle(a) arr
> FROM
> (SELECT ARRAY(SELECT generate_series(1, 1000000)) a),
> generate_series(1, 10);
>
> postgres=# SELECT (sort(arr))[1] FROM arrays_to_sort; -- original
> Time: 990.199 ms
> postgres=# SELECT (sort(arr))[1] FROM arrays_to_sort; -- patched
> Time: 696.156 ms
>
> The benefit seems to be on the order of magnitude with 30% speedup.
>
> There's plenty of sorting by TransactionId, BlockNumber, OffsetNumber, Oid
> etc. But this sorting routines never show up in perf top or something like
> that.
>
> Seems like in most cases we do not spend much time in sorting. But
> specialization does not cost us much too, only some CPU cycles of a
> compiler. I think we can further improve speedup by converting inline
> comparator to value extractor: more compilers will see what is actually
> going on. But I have no proofs for this reasoning.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
>
> [0]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20240209184014.sobshkcsfjix6u4r%40awork3.anarazel.de#fc23df2cf314bef35095b632380b4a59
>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v42-0006-Implemented-benchmarking-for-optimized-sorting.patch | text/x-patch | 6.9 KB |
v42-0002-Optimized-Oid-List-Sorting-by-using-template-sor.patch | text/x-patch | 2.2 KB |
v42-0004-Optimized-Int-List-Sorting-by-using-template-sor.patch | text/x-patch | 2.4 KB |
v42-0005-Enhanced-Sorting-Efficiency-for-Integer-Lists.patch | text/x-patch | 1.8 KB |
v42-0003-Enhanced-Sorting-Efficiency-for-Oid-Lists.patch | text/x-patch | 2.6 KB |
v42-0001-Use-specialized-sort-facilities.patch | text/x-patch | 5.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-06-07 19:51:14 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |
Previous Message | Radu Radutiu | 2024-06-07 18:42:58 | Re: Postgresql OOM |