Uploaded image for project: 'Calcite'
  1. Calcite
  2. CALCITE-4558

Sort CPU cost should not incur per-field copy cost for alignment with filter and project

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Improvement
    • Status: Open
    • Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • 1.26.0
    • None
    • core
    • None

    Description

      Typical Java implementations of the sort do not copy rows (they copy references only), so
      it makes little sense to have "row width" as the key driver of the sort costing.

      The CPU cost for filter does not include "row copy" cost.

      Even though the implementations might be different, in-core costs should be aligned.

      For instance, the current, EnumerableLimitSort and EnumerableSort have bytesPerRow multiplier, however, the implementation does not copy rows field-by-field .

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          supercedes

          Improvement - An improvement or enhancement to an existing feature or task. CALCITE-4522 CPU cost of Sort should be lower if sort keys are empty

          • Minor - Minor loss of function, or other problem where easy workaround is present.
          • Closed

          Activity

            People

              Unassigned Unassigned
              vladimirsitnikov Vladimir Sitnikov
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated: