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

perf: simple select queries are inefficient compared to PG #14929

Open
lmatz opened this issue Feb 1, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

perf: simple select queries are inefficient compared to PG #14929

lmatz opened this issue Feb 1, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@lmatz
Copy link
Contributor

lmatz commented Feb 1, 2024

database0-cur.log

Researcher @suyZhong pointed out today that when running all the queries in the file above, PG takes less than 1 second while RW runs for a very long time.

Reproduced it on my laptop.

PG:

martin@Martins-MacBook-Pro risingwave % time psql -f database0-cur.log
...
psql -f database0-cur.log  0.13s user 0.07s system 40% cpu 0.510 total

RW:

time psql -h localhost -p 4566 -d dev -U root -f database0-cur.log
...
psql -h localhost -p 4566 -d dev -U root -f database0-cur.log  0.19s user 0.19s system 0% cpu 1:45.13 total

Although some queries are slow due to "feature unimplemented" and flushing insert statements, they take only a very small fraction of all the queries.

We remark that query_mode has been set to local in the file above.

@lmatz lmatz added the type/perf label Feb 1, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the release-1.7 milestone Feb 1, 2024
@BugenZhao
Copy link
Member

We may leverage the distributed tracing to identify the bottleneck of one batch query.

@lmatz lmatz modified the milestones: release-1.7, release-1.8 Mar 6, 2024
@fuyufjh fuyufjh modified the milestones: release-1.8, release-1.9 Apr 8, 2024
@chenzl25 chenzl25 removed this from the release-1.9 milestone May 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 1, 2024

This issue has been open for 60 days with no activity.

If you think it is still relevant today, and needs to be done in the near future, you can comment to update the status, or just manually remove the no-issue-activity label.

You can also confidently close this issue as not planned to keep our backlog clean.
Don't worry if you think the issue is still valuable to continue in the future.
It's searchable and can be reopened when it's time. 😄

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants