Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(storage): avoid copy key slice in storage table iter when unnecessary #19717

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 11, 2024

Conversation

wenym1
Copy link
Contributor

@wenym1 wenym1 commented Dec 9, 2024

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

Previously in the iter of StorageTable and StateTable, we yield KeyedRow, which includes the TableKey<Bytes> of the row. The TableKey<Bytes> is created by copying from a key slice yielded from StateStoreIter. Creating such TableKey<Bytes> involves memory allocation and slice clone, which may incur extra cost. However, in some cases, the key is discarded and not used, which makes the extra cost unnecessary. The key is used mostly for sorting the result of multiple iters, and when the key is not used, we don't have to create the key.

Therefore, in this PR, we will try to avoid creating unnecessary keys. In StorageTable, the key is kept for doing merge_sort. merge_sort is used only when specified ordered = true and having more than one vnodes. Therefore, when merge_sort is not used, we change to return a stream that only yields OwnedRow, and when using merge_sort, we will include the key in the input of merge_sort, and then discard the key in the output.

The iter_xxx methods of StorageTable and StateTable previously yield the KeyedRow. In this PR, the items of these methods become OwnedRow. Some streaming executors may still need the KeyedRow for sorting, and therefore we provide an extra iter_keyed_row_with_prefix as a counterpart to iter_with_prefix and yield KeyedRow. So as is methods that call iter_log.

Checklist

  • I have written necessary rustdoc comments
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
  • I have added test labels as necessary. See details.
  • I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them. (Optional, recommended for new SQL features Sqlsmith: Sql feature generation #7934).
  • My PR contains breaking changes. (If it deprecates some features, please create a tracking issue to remove them in the future).
  • All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)
  • My PR changes performance-critical code. (Please run macro/micro-benchmarks and show the results.)
  • My PR contains critical fixes that are necessary to be merged into the latest release. (Please check out the details)

Documentation

  • My PR needs documentation updates. (Please use the Release note section below to summarize the impact on users)

Release note

If this PR includes changes that directly affect users or other significant modifications relevant to the community, kindly draft a release note to provide a concise summary of these changes. Please prioritize highlighting the impact these changes will have on users.

Copy link
Contributor Author

wenym1 commented Dec 9, 2024

Copy link
Member

@stdrc stdrc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The state table & executor parts LGTM

Copy link
Collaborator

@hzxa21 hzxa21 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@wenym1 wenym1 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 10, 2024 10:26
@wenym1 wenym1 force-pushed the yiming/storage-table-iter-avoid-slice-clone branch from 3bc565b to 641fa65 Compare December 10, 2024 10:30
@wenym1 wenym1 force-pushed the yiming/storage-table-iter-avoid-slice-clone branch from 641fa65 to a3f0881 Compare December 10, 2024 10:35
@wenym1 wenym1 enabled auto-merge December 10, 2024 11:25
@wenym1 wenym1 added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 10, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Dec 10, 2024
@wenym1 wenym1 added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 11, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit 67491ab Dec 11, 2024
29 of 30 checks passed
@wenym1 wenym1 deleted the yiming/storage-table-iter-avoid-slice-clone branch December 11, 2024 03:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants