Re: Improving executor performance - tidbitmap

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improving executor performance - tidbitmap
Date: 2016-07-15 03:45:37
Message-ID: 20160715034537.fci6tkua5ewfckpu@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-07-14 20:41:21 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > I've quickly hacked up an alternative linear addressing hashtable
> > implementation. And the improvements are quite remarkable.
> >
> > Example Query:
> > EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT SUM(l_extendedprice) FROM lineitem WHERE (l_shipdate >= '1995-01-01'::date) AND (l_shipdate <= '1996-12-31'::date);
>
> > timing without analyze: 4136.425 4101.873 4177.441
> >
> > after:
>
> > timing without analyze: 2647.364 2674.456 2680.197
> >
> > as you can see the the time for the bitmap index scan goes from 2461.622
> > to 952.161.
>
> That's pretty great. I wonder what this would look like with a BRIN
> index, since l_shipdate looks like a good candidate for BRIN indexing.

Brin indexes IIRC always end up using tidbitmap.c, so the benefits
should be there as well ;)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-07-15 03:53:07 Re: Reviewing freeze map code
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-07-15 03:41:21 Re: Improving executor performance - tidbitmap