-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
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
Table Scan Performance Tests #497
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
6d0a7ee
to
56f068e
Compare
@Xuanwo and @liurenjie1024: This is now passing and ready for review. |
f90d2d4
to
a00b32a
Compare
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.
Thanks a lot for driving this work!
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.
Thanks @sdd for this pr. I just skimmed through it and got your points here. I have some concerns with this approach, for example, I feel this approach is difficult to maintain and extend to other cases. I'm more interested in integrated with datafusion to do such thing, like integration tests and benchmark. What do you think?
…n measuring performance of row group filtering and row selection
This PR adds some performance testing capabilities. It includes the following features:
TableScan.plan_files
in four different representative scenariosTableScan.to_arrow
in four different representative scenariosThe performance tests can be set up and ran by running
just perf-run
. This will trigger the following actions before actually running the tests. It checks each item to see if it actually needs to be run, skipping if already done on a previous run: