Re: Yet another vectorized engine

From: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Hubert Zhang <hzhang(at)pivotal(dot)io>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Gang Xiong <gxiong(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Asim R P <apraveen(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Ning Yu <nyu(at)pivotal(dot)io>
Subject: Re: Yet another vectorized engine
Date: 2020-02-10 17:20:27
Message-ID: 7381c2ee-9776-9cff-dd7e-23345bcba6d7@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I have done some performance comparisons.
First of all I failed to run vectorized version of Q1 with master branch
of your repository and
PG9_6_STABLE branch of Postgres:

NOTICE:  query can't be vectorized
DETAIL:  Non plain agg is not supported

I have to switch to pg96 branch.

Results (seconds) of Q1 execution are the  following:

max_parallel_workers_per_gather
PG9_6, enable_vectorize_engine=off
PG9_6, enable_vectorize_engine=on
master (jit=on)
0
36
20
10
4
10
-
5

I failed to run parallel version of Q1 with enable_vectorize_engine=on
because of the same error: "Non plain agg is not supported"

So looks like PG-13 provides significant advantages in OLAP queries
comparing with 9.6!
Definitely it doesn't mean that vectorized executor is not needed for
new version of Postgres.
Once been ported, I expect that it should provide comparable improvement
of performance.

But in any case I think that vectorized executor makes sense only been
combine with columnar store.

--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-02-10 17:23:57 Re: 2020-02-13 Press Release Draft
Previous Message Jonathan S. Katz 2020-02-10 17:07:33 Re: 2020-02-13 Press Release Draft