Query planning benchmark #127550
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ | ||
| /* | ||
| * Copyright Elasticsearch B.V. and/or licensed to Elasticsearch B.V. under one | ||
| * or more contributor license agreements. Licensed under the "Elastic License | ||
| * 2.0", the "GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 only", and the "Server Side | ||
| * Public License v 1"; you may not use this file except in compliance with, at | ||
| * your election, the "Elastic License 2.0", the "GNU Affero General Public | ||
| * License v3.0 only", or the "Server Side Public License, v 1". | ||
| */ | ||
|
|
||
| package org.elasticsearch.benchmark.esql; | ||
|
|
||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.logging.LogConfigurator; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.settings.Settings; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.index.IndexMode; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.license.XPackLicenseState; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.analysis.Analyzer; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.analysis.AnalyzerContext; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.analysis.EnrichResolution; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.analysis.Verifier; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.core.expression.FoldContext; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.core.type.EsField; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.core.util.DateUtils; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.expression.function.EsqlFunctionRegistry; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.index.EsIndex; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.index.IndexResolution; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.inference.InferenceResolution; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.optimizer.LogicalOptimizerContext; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.optimizer.LogicalPlanOptimizer; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.parser.EsqlParser; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.parser.QueryParams; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.plan.logical.LogicalPlan; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.plugin.EsqlPlugin; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.plugin.QueryPragmas; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.session.Configuration; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.telemetry.Metrics; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.telemetry.PlanTelemetry; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Benchmark; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.BenchmarkMode; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Fork; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Measurement; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Mode; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.OutputTimeUnit; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Scope; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Setup; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.State; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Warmup; | ||
| import org.openjdk.jmh.infra.Blackhole; | ||
|
|
||
| import java.util.LinkedHashMap; | ||
| import java.util.Locale; | ||
| import java.util.Map; | ||
| import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; | ||
|
|
||
| import static java.util.Collections.emptyMap; | ||
| import static org.elasticsearch.xpack.esql.core.type.DataType.TEXT; | ||
|
|
||
| @Fork(1) | ||
| @Warmup(iterations = 5) | ||
| @Measurement(iterations = 10) | ||
| @BenchmarkMode(Mode.AverageTime) | ||
| @OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) | ||
| @State(Scope.Benchmark) | ||
| public class QueryPlanningBenchmark { | ||
|
|
||
| static { | ||
| LogConfigurator.configureESLogging(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private PlanTelemetry telemetry; | ||
| private EsqlParser parser; | ||
| private Analyzer analyzer; | ||
| private LogicalPlanOptimizer optimizer; | ||
|
|
||
| @Setup | ||
| public void setup() { | ||
|
|
||
| var config = new Configuration( | ||
| DateUtils.UTC, | ||
| Locale.US, | ||
| null, | ||
| null, | ||
| new QueryPragmas(Settings.EMPTY), | ||
| EsqlPlugin.QUERY_RESULT_TRUNCATION_MAX_SIZE.getDefault(Settings.EMPTY), | ||
| EsqlPlugin.QUERY_RESULT_TRUNCATION_DEFAULT_SIZE.getDefault(Settings.EMPTY), | ||
| "", | ||
| false, | ||
| Map.of(), | ||
| System.nanoTime(), | ||
| false | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| var fields = 10_000; | ||
| var mapping = LinkedHashMap.<String, EsField>newLinkedHashMap(fields); | ||
| for (int i = 0; i < fields; i++) { | ||
| mapping.put("field" + i, new EsField("field-" + i, TEXT, emptyMap(), true)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| var esIndex = new EsIndex("test", mapping, Map.of("test", IndexMode.STANDARD)); | ||
|
|
||
| var functionRegistry = new EsqlFunctionRegistry(); | ||
|
|
||
| telemetry = new PlanTelemetry(functionRegistry); | ||
| parser = new EsqlParser(); | ||
| analyzer = new Analyzer( | ||
| new AnalyzerContext( | ||
| config, | ||
| functionRegistry, | ||
| IndexResolution.valid(esIndex), | ||
| Map.of(), | ||
| new EnrichResolution(), | ||
| InferenceResolution.EMPTY | ||
| ), | ||
| new Verifier(new Metrics(functionRegistry), new XPackLicenseState(() -> 0L)) | ||
| ); | ||
| optimizer = new LogicalPlanOptimizer(new LogicalOptimizerContext(config, FoldContext.small())); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private LogicalPlan plan(String query) { | ||
| var parsed = parser.createStatement(query, new QueryParams(), telemetry); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I am puzzled why Could somebody share history behind that? There was a problem hiding this comment.
The
I think this is required by the inheritance / hierarchy, the context being set in a parent class |
||
| var analyzed = analyzer.analyze(parsed); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Not sure if we care, but this literally can be a single line: |
||
| var optimized = optimizer.optimize(analyzed); | ||
| return optimized; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Benchmark | ||
| public void run(Blackhole blackhole) { | ||
| blackhole.consume(plan("FROM test | LIMIT 10")); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For planning purposes, do we care that all fields are
TEXT? Really asking - is field types something else we should vary?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You have to start somewhere I suppose. I don't believe the types make a big difference for the query being tested in this case.
It's pretty normal to build parameters on these things so you run it like:
Or something. There's a bit of tension here because the default if you run it without any parameters is to run it with the combinatorial explosion of all of a configured set of parameters - and that can be trouble. We're expecting to be a bit more selective on how we run these than that. But, yeah, I think this PR is a good start and can tell us a lot as is.