Closed
Conversation
pgj
force-pushed
the
feat/covering-indexes-phase-1
branch
5 times, most recently
from
4e33d87 to
618832d
Compare
pgj
force-pushed
the
feat/covering-indexes-phase-1
branch
from
ace6a5b to
b976247
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
This pull request was closed by accident. |
Contributor
Author
|
The PR was re-submitted as #4512. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request aims to implement the first phase of the covering indexes work ("keys-only covering indexes") as it was described in the corresponding RFC document by @mikerhodes, see #4410 and #4413 for the details.
Ideally, end users should not notice any change in the behavior but speed-ups for certain kind of queries. Performance results obtained by k6 on my MacBook Pro 2021 M1 Max, with 10,000 documents, compared against
a9bce2f598edc8ef843baa9412c60d22157eeabfwith 3 nodes:min=0.60ms max=3223.65ms p(95)=2113.95ms p(98)=2354.79ms p(99)=2505.30msmin=0.50ms max=615.87ms p(95)=95.89ms p(98)=140.80ms p(99)=171.90msmin=73.09ms max=6245.72ms p(95)=3835.45ms p(98)=4376.79ms p(99)=5022.26msmin=2.65ms max=579.62ms p(95)=211.18ms p(98)=264.66ms p(99)=305.37msmin=0.80ms max=14991.06ms p(95)=13171.23ms p(98)=13975.51ms p(99)=14456.11msmin=0.87ms max=15379.69ms p(95)=10748.65ms p(98)=11998.88ms p(99)=12171.89msPlease find the details of the performance evaluation in
pgj/couchdb-k6/mango/couchdb_4482.Unit test coverage increased significantly, see before:
and then after:
Tasks:
src/docsfolder