Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Optimize bulk writing of all blocks of bloom filter #3340

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 13, 2022

Conversation

viirya
Copy link
Member

@viirya viirya commented Dec 13, 2022

Which issue does this PR close?

Part of #3320.

Rationale for this change

write_batch primitive/4096 values primitive with bloom filter                                                      
                        time:   [4.2750 ms 4.2905 ms 4.3059 ms]                                                    
                        thrpt:  [40.995 MiB/s 41.143 MiB/s 41.291 MiB/s]                                           
                 change:                                                                                           
                        time:   [-18.394% -16.070% -13.847%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)                                     
                        thrpt:  [+16.072% +19.147% +22.541%]                              
                        Performance has improved.                                                                  
write_batch primitive/4096 values primitive non-null with bloom filter     
                        time:   [4.4500 ms 4.5848 ms 4.7319 ms]                 
                        thrpt:  [36.582 MiB/s 37.756 MiB/s 38.900 MiB/s]
                 change:                                                                                           
                        time:   [-21.355% -17.148% -12.445%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)                                     
                        thrpt:  [+14.214% +20.697% +27.153%]                                                       
                        Performance has improved.                                                                  
write_batch primitive/4096 values string with bloom filter
                        time:   [945.94 µs 946.62 µs 947.37 µs]
                        thrpt:  [84.060 MiB/s 84.126 MiB/s 84.186 MiB/s]
                 change:
                        time:   [-26.414% -25.196% -23.997%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
                        thrpt:  [+31.573% +33.682% +35.895%]
                        Performance has improved.
write_batch primitive/4096 values string dictionary with bloom filter
                        time:   [494.68 µs 495.13 µs 495.60 µs]
                        thrpt:  [97.137 MiB/s 97.230 MiB/s 97.318 MiB/s]
                 change:
                        time:   [-19.467% -18.637% -17.900%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
                        thrpt:  [+21.803% +22.905% +24.173%]
                        Performance has improved.
write_batch primitive/4096 values string non-null with bloom filter
                        time:   [1.0266 ms 1.0275 ms 1.0284 ms]
                        thrpt:  [76.484 MiB/s 76.553 MiB/s 76.618 MiB/s]
                 change:
                        time:   [-28.422% -28.120% -27.852%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
                        thrpt:  [+38.604% +39.121% +39.709%]
                        Performance has improved.

What changes are included in this PR?

Are there any user-facing changes?

@github-actions github-actions bot added the parquet Changes to the parquet crate label Dec 13, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@tustvold tustvold left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if we should be encouraging users to wrap File in a BufWriter? I.e. add this higher up. We likely don't want BufWriter when writing to Vec<u8> though... 🤔

@viirya
Copy link
Member Author

viirya commented Dec 13, 2022

Yea, seems other parts of the parquet writer could have benefit from BufWriter if we can add it higher.

@tustvold tustvold merged commit 2749dcc into apache:master Dec 13, 2022
@ursabot
Copy link

ursabot commented Dec 13, 2022

Benchmark runs are scheduled for baseline = 46b2848 and contender = 2749dcc. 2749dcc is a master commit associated with this PR. Results will be available as each benchmark for each run completes.
Conbench compare runs links:
[Skipped ⚠️ Benchmarking of arrow-rs-commits is not supported on ec2-t3-xlarge-us-east-2] ec2-t3-xlarge-us-east-2
[Skipped ⚠️ Benchmarking of arrow-rs-commits is not supported on test-mac-arm] test-mac-arm
[Skipped ⚠️ Benchmarking of arrow-rs-commits is not supported on ursa-i9-9960x] ursa-i9-9960x
[Skipped ⚠️ Benchmarking of arrow-rs-commits is not supported on ursa-thinkcentre-m75q] ursa-thinkcentre-m75q
Buildkite builds:
Supported benchmarks:
ec2-t3-xlarge-us-east-2: Supported benchmark langs: Python, R. Runs only benchmarks with cloud = True
test-mac-arm: Supported benchmark langs: C++, Python, R
ursa-i9-9960x: Supported benchmark langs: Python, R, JavaScript
ursa-thinkcentre-m75q: Supported benchmark langs: C++, Java

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
parquet Changes to the parquet crate
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants