2010YOUY01 opened a new pull request, #13306:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/13306
## Which issue does this PR close?
<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can
link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123`
indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
-->
Closes #.
## Rationale for this change
I noticed there is no benchmark to test sorting the whole relational table:
existing sort benchmark is only for a single `SortExec`, and this can't test
how would end-to-end large sort query scale to multiple CPU cores. With
integration test, it is possible to see the combined performance of local sort
on small batches and final step multi way sort-preserving merge.
The benchmark includes 10 queries to sort the entire `lineitem` table in
TPCH dataset, with different characteristics. For example: with different
number of sort key/ payload columns, different sort key types and cardinality,
etc. Also it is easy to add more benchmark queries.
More details see `sort_integration.rs`
<!--
Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in
the issue then this section is not needed.
Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your
changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.
-->
## What changes are included in this PR?
Added a single benchmark binary for benchmark. It can be executed with:
```sh
# Under benchmarks/
./bench.sh run sort_integration
```
```
Q1 iteration 0 took 211.0 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q1 iteration 1 took 186.7 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q1 iteration 2 took 184.2 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q1 iteration 3 took 185.4 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q1 iteration 4 took 189.4 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q1 avg time: 191.36 ms
Q2 iteration 0 took 156.9 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q2 iteration 1 took 163.4 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q2 iteration 2 took 166.2 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q2 iteration 3 took 162.5 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q2 iteration 4 took 169.5 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q2 avg time: 163.70 ms
Q3 iteration 0 took 806.1 ms and returned 6001215 rows
Q3 iteration 1 took 812.8 ms and returned 6001215 rows
......
```
Query run results comparing sorting `lineitem` table with scaling factor 1
and 5
```
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query ┃ sort-lineitem-sf1 ┃ sort-lineitem-sf5 ┃ Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Q1 │ 186.49ms │ 1244.18ms │ 6.67x slower │
│ Q2 │ 156.91ms │ 1000.38ms │ 6.38x slower │
│ Q3 │ 804.57ms │ 4682.39ms │ 5.82x slower │
│ Q4 │ 241.32ms │ 1464.02ms │ 6.07x slower │
│ Q5 │ 407.56ms │ 2037.05ms │ 5.00x slower │
│ Q6 │ 441.52ms │ 2193.89ms │ 4.97x slower │
│ Q7 │ 786.11ms │ 7000.62ms │ 8.91x slower │
│ Q8 │ 535.87ms │ 2835.62ms │ 5.29x slower │
│ Q9 │ 532.31ms │ 2957.57ms │ 5.56x slower │
│ Q10 │ 841.96ms │ 9289.74ms │ 11.03x slower │
└──────────────┴───────────────────┴───────────────────┴───────────────┘
```
<!--
There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
-->
## Are these changes tested?
<!--
We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are
they covered by existing tests)?
-->
## Are there any user-facing changes?
<!--
If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be
updated before approving the PR.
-->
<!--
If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api
change` label.
-->
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
