issue#1503: memtable scan optimization #1504
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
|
please fill the pull request form, thanks |
Lwk135
force-pushed
the
memtable_scan_optimization_1503
branch
6 times, most recently
from
e68e0f3
to
3ceb0b1
Compare
ZenoWang
reviewed
Aug 15, 2023
| @@ -170,6 +171,27 @@ class ObMemtableScanIterator : public ObIMemtableScanIterator | |||
| uint8_t iter_flag_; | |||
| }; | |||
|
|
|||
| class ObMemtableBlockScanIterator : public ObMemtableScanIterator | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe inherit the ObIMemtableScanIterator class here?
ZenoWang
reviewed
Aug 15, 2023
| const common::ObIArray<blocksstable::ObStorageDatum> &default_datums = filter->get_default_datums(); | ||
| const blocksstable::ObColDescIArray &cols_desc = read_info_->get_columns_desc(); | ||
|
|
||
| for (int64_t row_idx = pd_filter_info.start_; OB_SUCC(ret) && row_idx < pd_filter_info.end_; ++row_idx) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If pd_filter_info.start_ is always 0, perhaps we could use pd_filter_info.row_count_ to iterate all rows?
Use row_count appears to be clearer and more straightforward to comprehend for me.
ZenoWang
reviewed
Aug 15, 2023
| if (filter->is_logic_and_node()) { | ||
| if (OB_FAIL(result->bit_and(*child_result))) { | ||
| LOG_WARN("Failed to merge result bitmap", K(ret), KP(child_result)); | ||
| } else if (result->is_all_false()) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add unittest case to test these situations :
- skip partitial rows in next child filter node
- skip all next child nodes when all_false or all_true
ZenoWang
reviewed
Aug 15, 2023
src/storage/memtable/ob_memtable.cpp
Outdated
| // TRANS_LOG(INFO, "Memtable scan iterator choice : normal"); | ||
| // } | ||
| if (tenant_config.is_valid()) { | ||
| if (tenant_config->memtable_scan_filter_pushdown) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are two suggestions:
- The code here is a little redundant.
- We can use _pushdown_storage_level config
Lwk135
force-pushed
the
memtable_scan_optimization_1503
branch
5 times, most recently
from
e073cec
to
f43d6d6
Compare
Lwk135
force-pushed
the
memtable_scan_optimization_1503
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2ad003d
to
15ad5d1
Compare
Lwk135
force-pushed
the
memtable_scan_optimization_1503
branch
from
15ad5d1
to
aa21c19
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Task Description
close #1503
Solution Description
(1) First, enable single edge table scan for memtable, which is the basis for later optimization.
(2) Second, acquire a batch of rows instead of only one.
(3) Third, use bitmap result to calculate the whole batch.
Passed Regressions
Upgrade Compatibility
Other Information
Release Note