Re: POC: GROUP BY optimization
Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
From: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: "Andrey V. Lepikhov" <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>,
Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-03-29T02:02:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Restore preprocess_groupclause()
- 505c008ca37c 17.0 landed
-
Rename PathKeyInfo to GroupByOrdering
- 0c1af2c35c7b 17.0 landed
-
Add invariants check to get_useful_group_keys_orderings()
- 91143c03d4ca 17.0 landed
-
Fix asymmetry in setting EquivalenceClass.ec_sortref
- 199012a3d844 17.0 landed
-
Multiple revisions to the GROUP BY reordering tests
- 874d817baa16 17.0 landed
-
Get rid of pg_class usage in SJE regression tests
- e1b7fde418f2 17.0 landed
-
Rename index "abc" in aggregates.sql
- b91f91870828 17.0 landed
-
Explore alternative orderings of group-by pathkeys during optimization.
- 0452b461bc40 17.0 landed
-
Generalize the common code of adding sort before processing of grouping
- 7ab80ac1caf9 17.0 landed
-
Fix out-dated comment in preprocess_groupclause()
- f6c70b81802a 15.0 landed
- 78a9af1a2764 16.0 landed
-
Force parallelism in partition_aggregate
- 2fe6b2a806f2 16.0 landed
- 01474f56981a 15.0 landed
-
Optimize order of GROUP BY keys
- db0d67db2401 15.0 landed
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:49 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a rebased/improved version of the patch, with smaller parts
> addressing various issues. There are seven parts:
>
> 0001 - main part, just rebased
>
> 0002 - replace the debug GUC options with a single GUC to disable the
> optimization if needed
>
> 0003 - minor code cleanup, removal of unnecessary variable
>
> 0004 - various comment fixes (rewordings, typos, ...)
>
> 0005 - a minor code simplification, addressing FIXMEs from 0004
>
> 0006 - adds the new GUC to the docs
>
> 0007 - demonstrates plan changes with a disabled optimization
>
> The first 6 parts should be squashed and committed at one, I only kept
> them separate for clarity. The 0007 is merely a demonstration of the new
> GUC and that it disables the optimization.
>
> > Agree. Because it is a kind of automation we should allow user to switch
> > it off in the case of problems or manual tuning.
> > > Also, I looked through this patch. It has some minor problems:
> > 1. Multiple typos in the patch comment.
>
> I went through the comments and checked all of them for grammar mistakes
> and typos using a word processor, so hopefully that should be OK. But
> maybe there's still something wrong.
>
> > 2. The term 'cardinality of a key' - may be replace with 'number of
> > duplicates'?
>
> No, cardinality means "number of distinct values", so "duplicates" would
> be wrong. And I think "cardinality" is well established term, so I think
> it's fine.
>
> BTW I named the GUC enable_group_by_reordering, I wonder if it should be
> named differently, e.g. enable_groupby_reordering? Opinions?
>
>
> regards
>
> --
> Tomas Vondra
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Hi,
For 0001-Optimize-order-of-GROUP-BY-keys-20220328.patch:
multiple parametes need to be
parametes -> parameters
leave more expensive comparions
comparions -> comparisons
+ if (has_fake_var == false)
The above can be written as:
if (!has_fake_var)
+ nGroups = ceil(2.0 + sqrt(tuples) * (i + 1) /
list_length(pathkeys));
Looks like the value of tuples doesn't change inside the loop.
You can precompute sqrt(tuples) outside the loop and store the value in a
variable.
+ return -1;
+ else if (a->cost == b->cost)
+ return 0;
+ return 1;
the keyword 'else' is not needed.
+ * Returns newly allocated lists. If no reordering is possible (or needed),
+ * the lists are set to NIL.
+ */
+static bool
+get_cheapest_group_keys_order(PlannerInfo *root, double nrows,
It seems the comment for return value doesn't match the bool return type.
+ /* If this optimization is disabled, we're done. */
+ if (!debug_cheapest_group_by)
It seems enable_cheapest_group_by would be better name for the flag.
Cheers