Re: Yet another vectorized engine

Hi Konstantin,

I checkout your branch pg13 in repo
https://github.com/zhangh43/vectorize_engine
After I fixed some compile error, I tested Q1 on TPCH-10G
The result is different from yours and vectorize version is too slow. Note
that I disable parallel worker by default.
no JIT no Vectorize: 36 secs
with JIT only: 23 secs
with Vectorize only: 33 secs
JIT + Vectorize: 29 secs

My config option is `CFLAGS='-O3 -g -march=native'
--prefix=/usr/local/pgsql/ --disable-cassert --enable-debug --with-llvm`
I will do some spike on why vectorized is so slow. Could you please provide
your compile option and the TPCH dataset size and your queries(standard
Q1?) to help me to debug on it.

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:43 PM Hubert Zhang <hzhang(at)pivotal(dot)io> wrote:

> Hi Konstantin,
> I have added you as a collaborator on github. Please accepted and try
> again.
> I think non collaborator could also open pull requests.
>
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:02 PM Konstantin Knizhnik <
> k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 24.02.2020 05:08, Hubert Zhang wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 12:58 AM Konstantin Knizhnik <
>> k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12.02.2020 13:12, Hubert Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:20 AM Konstantin Knizhnik <
>>> k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the test. +1 on vectorize should be combine with columnar
>>> store. I think when we support this extension
>>> on master, we could try the new zedstore.
>>> I'm not active on this work now, but will continue when I have time.
>>> Feel free to join bring vops's feature into this extension.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Hubert Zhang
>>>
>>>
>>> I have ported vectorize_engine to the master.
>>> It takes longer than I expected: a lot of things were changed in
>>> executor.
>>>
>>> Results are the following:
>>>
>>>
>>> par.warkers
>>> PG9_6
>>> vectorize=off
>>> PG9_6
>>> vectorize=on
>>> master
>>> vectorize=off
>>> jit=on
>>> master
>>> vectorize=off
>>> jit=off master
>>> vectorize=on
>>> jit=ofn master
>>> vectorize=on
>>> jit=off
>>> 0
>>> 36
>>> 20
>>> 16
>>> 25.5
>>> 15
>>> 17.5
>>> 4
>>> 10
>>> -
>>> 5 7
>>> -
>>> -
>>>
>>> So it proves the theory that JIT provides almost the same speedup as
>>> vector executor (both eliminates interpretation overhead but in different
>>> way).
>>> I still not sure that we need vectorized executor: because with standard
>>> heap it provides almost no improvements comparing with current JIT version.
>>> But in any case I am going to test it with vertical storage (zedstore or
>>> cstore).
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks for the porting and testing.
>> Yes, PG master and 9.6 have many changes, not only executor, but also
>> tupletableslot interface.
>>
>> What matters the performance of JIT and Vectorization is its
>> implementation. This is just the beginning of vectorization work, just as
>> your vops extension reported, vectorization could run 10 times faster in
>> PG. With the overhead of row storage(heap), we may not reach that speedup,
>> but I think we could do better. Also +1 on vertical storage.
>>
>> BTW, welcome to submit your PR for the PG master version.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry, but I have no permissions to push changes to your repository.
>> I can certainly create my own fork of vectorize_engine, but I think it
>> will be beter if I push pg13 branch in your repository.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Hubert Zhang
>

--
Thanks

Hubert Zhang