Re: Small performance tweak to run-time partition pruning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Small performance tweak to run-time partition pruning
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f_Y72yWZrRCMxD_GEL1EEb-7aUsggCdNGcfvmE_RESZzg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Small performance tweak to run-time partition pruning  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses RE: Small performance tweak to run-time partition pruning  ("Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com>)
RE: Small performance tweak to run-time partition pruning  ("Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 7 September 2018 at 19:29, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> While reviewing some other patches to improve partitioning performance
> I noticed that one of the loops in ExecFindInitialMatchingSubPlans()
> could be coded a bit more efficiently.  The current code loops over
> all the original subplans checking if the subplan is newly pruned, if
> it is, the code sets the new_subplan_indexes array element to -1, else
> it sets it assigns the new subplan index.  This can be done more
> efficiently if we make this array 1-based and initialise the whole
> thing to 0 then just loop over the non-pruned subplans instead of all
> subplans. Pruning all but 1 subplan is quite common.

I was looking at this again and I realised that we can completely skip
the re-sequence of the subplan map when we're not going to perform any
further pruning during execution. We possibly could also not make a
copy of the subplan_map in this case at all in
ExecCreatePartitionPruneState(), and just take the planner's copy
verbatim as we do for the subpart_map.  I was just unable to see any
performance gains from doing this, so I've just left it for now.

Currently, this improves performance about 2% with prepared queries
and 300 partitions.

Patched:

tps = 5169.169452 (excluding connections establishing)
tps = 5155.914286 (excluding connections establishing)

Unpatched:
tps = 5059.511370 (excluding connections establishing)
tps = 5082.851062 (excluding connections establishing)

However with other patches to remove partitioning bottlenecks in the
executor, the TPS goes to about 25,000, so 2% becomes 10%, which seems
more meaningful.

I've attached an updated patch which skips the re-sequence work when
doing that is not required for anything.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: executor relation handling
Next
From: Andrew Gierth
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance improvements for src/port/snprintf.c