-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
[opt](fe) opt the performance for setColumnPositionMapping #60003
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
Conversation
|
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Please clearly describe your PR:
|
|
run buildall |
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 32032 ms |
TPC-DS: Total hot run time: 174521 ms |
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 26.89 s |
FE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
|
run p0 |
|
run cloud_p0 |
|
run external |
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
1 similar comment
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
|
run buildall |
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 31305 ms |
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
TPC-DS: Total hot run time: 174991 ms |
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 26.76 s |
FE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
FE Regression Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage |
morningman
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
### What problem does this PR solve? When there are large of columns(such as 3W columns) in table, setColumnPositionMapping function will be the main performance bottleneck. this pr opt it from $O(N \times M)$ to $O(N + M)$
### What problem does this PR solve? When there are large of columns(such as 3W columns) in table, setColumnPositionMapping function will be the main performance bottleneck. this pr opt it from $O(N \times M)$ to $O(N + M)$
### What problem does this PR solve? like #60003, When there are large of columns(such as 3W columns) in table, TupleDescriptor.getSlot function will be the main performance bottleneck. **Before** ``` - Init Scan Node Time: 1s94ms ``` **After** ``` - Init Scan Node Time: 145ms ``` ### Release note None ### Check List (For Author) - Test <!-- At least one of them must be included. --> - [ ] Regression test - [ ] Unit Test - [ ] Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below) - [ ] No need to test or manual test. Explain why: - [ ] This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed. - [ ] Previous test can cover this change. - [ ] No code files have been changed. - [ ] Other reason <!-- Add your reason? --> - Behavior changed: - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Explain the behavior change --> - Does this need documentation? - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Add document PR link here. eg: apache/doris-website#1214 --> ### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR) - [ ] Confirm the release note - [ ] Confirm test cases - [ ] Confirm document - [ ] Add branch pick label <!-- Add branch pick label that this PR should merge into -->
### What problem does this PR solve? like #60003, When there are large of columns(such as 3W columns) in table, TupleDescriptor.getSlot function will be the main performance bottleneck. **Before** ``` - Init Scan Node Time: 1s94ms ``` **After** ``` - Init Scan Node Time: 145ms ``` ### Release note None ### Check List (For Author) - Test <!-- At least one of them must be included. --> - [ ] Regression test - [ ] Unit Test - [ ] Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below) - [ ] No need to test or manual test. Explain why: - [ ] This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed. - [ ] Previous test can cover this change. - [ ] No code files have been changed. - [ ] Other reason <!-- Add your reason? --> - Behavior changed: - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Explain the behavior change --> - Does this need documentation? - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Add document PR link here. eg: apache/doris-website#1214 --> ### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR) - [ ] Confirm the release note - [ ] Confirm test cases - [ ] Confirm document - [ ] Add branch pick label <!-- Add branch pick label that this PR should merge into -->
What problem does this PR solve?
When there are large of columns(such as 3W columns) in table, setColumnPositionMapping function will be the main performance bottleneck.
this pr opt it from$O(N \times M)$ to $O(N + M)$
Release note
None
Check List (For Author)
Test
Behavior changed:
Does this need documentation?
Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)