[EPIC] A list of performance improvement tickets

[alamb]

This has a list of performance improvements:

• Use Arrow Row Format in SortExec to improve performance #5230
• Improve the performance of Aggregator, grouping, aggregation #4973
• Improved performance of RANGE preceding window functions #4904
• Improve Sorting / Merge performance  #2427
• Possible performance regressions #5061
• Make aggregate accumulators storage column-based  #956
• Optimize hash_aggregate when there are no null group keys #850
• Improve grouping performance by special casing small / fixed size keys #846
• Improve performance of COUNT (distinct x) for dictionary columns #258
• Improve performance if IN list function #145
• Improve like/nlike performance #88
• Improve the performance of COUNT DISTINCT queries for high cardinality groups #5547
• Add projection to FilterExec to avoid unecessary output creation #5436
• Poor reported performance of DataFusion against DuckDB and Hyper #5942
• datafusion-cli scanning a single large parquet file uses only a single core #5995
• Fuse grouped aggregate and filter operators for improved performance #5944
• Row accumulator support update Scalar values #6002
• Run DataFusion benchmarks regularly and track performance history over time #5504
• TPCH, Query 18 and 17 very slow #5646
• Add projection to HashJoinExec to avoid unecessary output creation #6768
• Speed up hash partitioning #6822
• Benchmarks for group by spilling to disk #7571
• Materialize Dictionaries in Group Keys #7647
• [EPIC] (Even More) Grouping / Group By / Aggregation Performance #7000
• Bad Join Order for TPCH Q18 results in slow performance #7950
• Bad Join Order for TPCH Q17 results in slow performance #7949
• Push Dynamic Join Predicates into Scan ("Sideways Information Passing", etc) #7955
• Avoid extra copies in CoalesceBatchesExec to improve performance #7957
• Reported DataFusion performance problem  #9148

[jaylmiller]

I'd be interested in picking up one of these... is #846 currently being worked on? If not you could assign me, @alamb ? Otherwise, they all look pretty interesting to me so feel free to assign me to something else on the list

[alamb]

Thanks @jaylmiller !

I'd be interested in picking up one of these... is #846 currently being worked on? If not you could assign me, @alamb ? Otherwise, they all look pretty interesting to me so feel free to assign me to something else on the list

I dont think #846 is being worked on, but given that the GroupByHash now uses the row format, I am not sure how relevant it is.

Please do feel free to comment on any ticket that is interesting -- no need to have it assigned to work on something!

Thanks for all the help so far on making Sort faster

[jaylmiller]

Thanks @jaylmiller !

I'd be interested in picking up one of these... is #846 currently being worked on? If not you could assign me, @alamb ? Otherwise, they all look pretty interesting to me so feel free to assign me to something else on the list

I dont think #846 is being worked on, but given that the GroupByHash now uses the row format, I am not sure how relevant it is.

Please do feel free to comment on any ticket that is interesting -- no need to have it assigned to work on something!

Thanks for all the help so far on making Sort faster

Sounds good! #846 was kindof arbitrary to be honest 😅, I'll read thru them more closely and pick one that seems interesting.

[alamb]

Sounds good! #846 was kindof arbitrary to be honest 😅, I'll read thru them more closely and pick one that seems interesting.

Awesome -- thanks @jaylmiller

I think in general the "make aggregation faster" #4973 and high cardinality groups #5547 are the most pressing things from a performance perspective.

However, they are also the ones with the most active thought / work on them, so they probably need some more coordination, which you may or ma not be interested in doing