Re: Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]
Date: 2016-11-28 09:32:37
Message-ID: CAFiTN-s_ngWE-MrtPk96Dtz4goBSM=ewkM8W5maxxzSdK_rBPQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As promised, I have taken the performance with TPCH benchmark and
> still result are quite good. However this are less compared to older
> version (which was exposing expr ctx and slot to heap).
>
> Query Head [1] Patch3 Improvement
> Q3 36122.425 32285.608 10%
> Q4 6797 5763.871 15%
> Q10 17996.104 15878.505 11%
> Q12 12399.651 9969.489 19%
>
> [1] heap_scankey_pushdown_POC_V3.patch : attached with the mail.

I forgot to mention the configuration parameter in last mail..

TPCH-scale factor 10.
work mem 20MB
Power, 4 socket machine
Shared Buffer 1GB

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Artur Zakirov 2016-11-28 09:39:54 Re: proposal: session server side variables
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2016-11-28 09:30:51 Re: Proposal: scan key push down to heap [WIP]