[HACKERS] Proposal: Improve bitmap costing for lossy pages - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject [HACKERS] Proposal: Improve bitmap costing for lossy pages
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-sYtqUOXQ4SpuhTv0Z9gD0si3YxZGv_PQAAMX8qbOotcg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Improve bitmap costing for lossy pages
Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Improve bitmap costing for lossy pages
List pgsql-hackers
I would like to propose a patch to improve the cost of bitmap heap
scan that is sensitive to work_mem.  Currently, in bitmap scan, we
don't consider work_mem. Now, in cases when there are a lot of lossy
pages bitmap scan gets selected that eventually leads to degraded
performance.

While evaluating parallel bitmap heap scan on TPCH we noticed that in
many queries selecting bitmap heap scan gives good performance high
work_mem but at low work_mem it slows the query compared to sequence
scan or index scan. This shows that bitmap heap scan is a better
alternative when most of the heap pages fit into work_mem.

Attached POC patch fixes the problem by considering work_mem for bitmap costing.

Performance numbers with this patch on different values of work_mem
are as follows,
workload: TPCH scale factor 20
machine: POWER 8

work_mem = 4MB
Query    Head(ms)    Patch(ms)    Improvement   Change in plan
    4       13759.632    14464.491   0.95x            PBHS -> PSS
    5       47581.558    41888.853   1.14x            BHS -> SS
    6       14051.553    13853.449   1.01x            PBHS -> PSS
    8        21529.98     11289.25     1.91x            PBHS -> PSS
  10        37844.51     34460.669   1.10x            BHS -> SS
  14        10131.49     15281.49     0.66x            BHS -> SS
  15        43579.833    34971.051  1.25x            BHS -> SS

work_mem = 20MB
Query    Head(ms)    Patch(ms)    Improvement   Change in plan
6           14592          13521.06      1.08x              PBHS -> PSS
8           20223.106   10716.062    1.89x              PBHS -> PSS
15         40486.957    33687.706   1.20x              BHS -> PSS

work_mem = 64MB
Query    Head(ms)    Patch(ms)  Improvement    Change in plan
15         40904.572    25750.873   1.59x              BHS -> PBHS

work_mem = 1GB
No plan got changed

Most of the queries show decent improvement, however, Q14 shows
regression at work_mem = 4MB. On analysing this case, I found that
number of pages_fetched calculated by "Mackert and Lohman formula" is
very high (1112817) compared to the actual unique heap pages fetched
(293314). Therefore, while costing bitmap scan using 1112817 pages and
4MB of work_mem, we predicted that even after we lossify all the pages
it can not fit into work_mem, hence bitmap scan was not selected.

-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Typo in json.c