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

store: use loser trees #7304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 26, 2024
Merged

store: use loser trees #7304

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 26, 2024

Conversation

GiedriusS
Copy link
Member

@GiedriusS GiedriusS commented Apr 25, 2024

Remove a long-standing TODO item in the code - let's use the great loser tree implementation by Bryan. It is faster than the heap because less comparisons are needed. Should be a nice improvement given that the merging is used in a lot of hot paths.

Since Prometheus also uses this library, it's tricky to import the "any" version. I tried doing bboreham/go-loser#3 but it's still impossible to do that. Let's just copy/paste the code, it's not a lot.

Bench:

goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pkg/store
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10885H CPU @ 2.40GHz
             │   oldkway   │               newkway               │
             │   sec/op    │    sec/op     vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   2.292m ± 3%   2.075m ± 15%  -9.47% (p=0.023 n=10)

             │   oldkway    │               newkway               │
             │     B/op     │     B/op      vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   1.553Mi ± 0%   1.585Mi ± 0%  +2.04% (p=0.000 n=10)

             │   oldkway   │              newkway               │
             │  allocs/op  │  allocs/op   vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   27.26k ± 0%   26.27k ± 0%  -3.66% (p=0.000 n=10)

Copy link
Contributor

@yeya24 yeya24 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know it is a dumb question. May I know why we have to use the any version, not the main one?

@GiedriusS
Copy link
Member Author

I know it is a dumb question. May I know why we have to use the any version, not the main one?

Because the main version works on:

type Value constraints.Ordered

In other words, any type that supports < and so on (https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x/exp/constraints#Ordered). It's not possible to do that with custom types like storepb.SeriesResponse.

@GiedriusS GiedriusS force-pushed the switch_to_losertree branch 4 times, most recently from bd65217 to 62faefb Compare April 26, 2024 13:42
Remove a long-standing TODO item in the code - let's use the great loser
tree implementation by Bryan. It is faster than the heap because less
comparisons are needed. Should be a nice improvement given that the heap
is used in a lot of hot paths.

Since Prometheus also uses this library, it's tricky to import the "any"
version. I tried doing bboreham/go-loser#3 but
it's still impossible to do that. Let's just copy/paste the code, it's
not a lot.

Bench:

```
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pkg/store
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10885H CPU @ 2.40GHz
             │   oldkway   │               newkway               │
             │   sec/op    │    sec/op     vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   2.292m ± 3%   2.075m ± 15%  -9.47% (p=0.023 n=10)

             │   oldkway    │               newkway               │
             │     B/op     │     B/op      vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   1.553Mi ± 0%   1.585Mi ± 0%  +2.04% (p=0.000 n=10)

             │   oldkway   │              newkway               │
             │  allocs/op  │  allocs/op   vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   27.26k ± 0%   26.27k ± 0%  -3.66% (p=0.000 n=10)
```

Signed-off-by: Giedrius Statkevičius <giedrius.statkevicius@vinted.com>
@@ -814,15 +754,15 @@ func (l *eagerRespSet) At() *storepb.SeriesResponse {
return nil
}

return l.bufferedResponses[l.i]
return l.bufferedResponses[l.i-1]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it because we call Next before At so we need to change to i-1?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, our dedup heap tree was a bit buggy - we were calling At() before Next() was ever called. The loser tree properly calls Next first hence this change

@yeya24 yeya24 merged commit 6bf98f9 into main Apr 26, 2024
20 checks passed
@GiedriusS GiedriusS deleted the switch_to_losertree branch April 26, 2024 19:48
Nashluffy pushed a commit to Nashluffy/thanos that referenced this pull request May 14, 2024
Remove a long-standing TODO item in the code - let's use the great loser
tree implementation by Bryan. It is faster than the heap because less
comparisons are needed. Should be a nice improvement given that the heap
is used in a lot of hot paths.

Since Prometheus also uses this library, it's tricky to import the "any"
version. I tried doing bboreham/go-loser#3 but
it's still impossible to do that. Let's just copy/paste the code, it's
not a lot.

Bench:

```
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pkg/store
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10885H CPU @ 2.40GHz
             │   oldkway   │               newkway               │
             │   sec/op    │    sec/op     vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   2.292m ± 3%   2.075m ± 15%  -9.47% (p=0.023 n=10)

             │   oldkway    │               newkway               │
             │     B/op     │     B/op      vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   1.553Mi ± 0%   1.585Mi ± 0%  +2.04% (p=0.000 n=10)

             │   oldkway   │              newkway               │
             │  allocs/op  │  allocs/op   vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   27.26k ± 0%   26.27k ± 0%  -3.66% (p=0.000 n=10)
```

Signed-off-by: Giedrius Statkevičius <giedrius.statkevicius@vinted.com>
Signed-off-by: mluffman <nashluffman@gmail.com>
GiedriusS added a commit to vinted/thanos that referenced this pull request May 31, 2024
jnyi pushed a commit to jnyi/thanos that referenced this pull request Jun 1, 2024
Remove a long-standing TODO item in the code - let's use the great loser
tree implementation by Bryan. It is faster than the heap because less
comparisons are needed. Should be a nice improvement given that the heap
is used in a lot of hot paths.

Since Prometheus also uses this library, it's tricky to import the "any"
version. I tried doing bboreham/go-loser#3 but
it's still impossible to do that. Let's just copy/paste the code, it's
not a lot.

Bench:

```
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pkg/store
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10885H CPU @ 2.40GHz
             │   oldkway   │               newkway               │
             │   sec/op    │    sec/op     vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   2.292m ± 3%   2.075m ± 15%  -9.47% (p=0.023 n=10)

             │   oldkway    │               newkway               │
             │     B/op     │     B/op      vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   1.553Mi ± 0%   1.585Mi ± 0%  +2.04% (p=0.000 n=10)

             │   oldkway   │              newkway               │
             │  allocs/op  │  allocs/op   vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   27.26k ± 0%   26.27k ± 0%  -3.66% (p=0.000 n=10)
```

Signed-off-by: Giedrius Statkevičius <giedrius.statkevicius@vinted.com>
jnyi pushed a commit to jnyi/thanos that referenced this pull request Jun 4, 2024
Remove a long-standing TODO item in the code - let's use the great loser
tree implementation by Bryan. It is faster than the heap because less
comparisons are needed. Should be a nice improvement given that the heap
is used in a lot of hot paths.

Since Prometheus also uses this library, it's tricky to import the "any"
version. I tried doing bboreham/go-loser#3 but
it's still impossible to do that. Let's just copy/paste the code, it's
not a lot.

Bench:

```
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pkg/store
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10885H CPU @ 2.40GHz
             │   oldkway   │               newkway               │
             │   sec/op    │    sec/op     vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   2.292m ± 3%   2.075m ± 15%  -9.47% (p=0.023 n=10)

             │   oldkway    │               newkway               │
             │     B/op     │     B/op      vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   1.553Mi ± 0%   1.585Mi ± 0%  +2.04% (p=0.000 n=10)

             │   oldkway   │              newkway               │
             │  allocs/op  │  allocs/op   vs base               │
KWayMerge-16   27.26k ± 0%   26.27k ± 0%  -3.66% (p=0.000 n=10)
```

Signed-off-by: Giedrius Statkevičius <giedrius.statkevicius@vinted.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants