Re: WIP: bloom filter in Hash Joins with batches

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: WIP: bloom filter in Hash Joins with batches
Дата
Msg-id CANP8+jK+rSLrDVFvkNngGa7BT0ML7d=dUkk+DappRKMTp4bRBw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: WIP: bloom filter in Hash Joins with batches  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: WIP: bloom filter in Hash Joins with batches  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: WIP: bloom filter in Hash Joins with batches  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 17 December 2015 at 16:00, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 12/17/2015 11:44 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:

My understanding is that the bloom filter would be ineffective in any of
these cases
* Hash table is too small

Yes, although it depends what you mean by "too small".

Essentially if we can do with a single batch, then it's cheaper to do a single lookup in the hash table instead of multiple lookups in the bloom filter. The bloom filter might still win if it fits into L3 cache, but that seems rather unlikely.

* Bloom filter too large

Too large with respect to what?

One obvious problem is that the bloom filter is built for all batches at once, i.e. for all tuples, so it may be so big won't fit into work_mem (or takes a significant part of it). Currently it's not accounted for, but that'll need to change.

The benefit seems to be related to cacheing, or at least that memory speed is critical. If the hash table is too small, or the bloom filter too large then there would be no benefit from performing the action (Lookup Bloom then maybe Lookup Hash) compared with just doing (LookupHash).

So the objective must be to get a Bloom Filter that is small enough that it lives in a higher/faster level of cache than the main Hash table. Or possibly that we separate that into a two stage process so that the first level can be applied by a GPU and then later checked against hash outside of a GPU.

I think you also need to consider whether we use a hash bloom filter or just simply apply an additional range predicate. The latter idea is similar to my earlier thoughts here http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+U5nMLYf2cgbq+YUw-ArLBTcPrqanBf5QiFEC-PBRJCFzOngg@mail.gmail.com

--
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Commit fest status for 2015-11
Следующее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: WIP: Rework access method interface