Skip to content

perf: optimize map_extract function lookup for common key types#21237

Open
lyne7-sc wants to merge 4 commits intoapache:mainfrom
lyne7-sc:perf/map_extract
Open

perf: optimize map_extract function lookup for common key types#21237
lyne7-sc wants to merge 4 commits intoapache:mainfrom
lyne7-sc:perf/map_extract

Conversation

@lyne7-sc
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lyne7-sc lyne7-sc commented Mar 29, 2026

Which issue does this PR close?

  • Closes #.

Rationale for this change

This PR optimizes map_extract for common key types. Previously, map_extract compared keys by building single-element array slices for each comparison. That is more expensive than necessary for common key types such as primitive integers, strings, and binary values.

What changes are included in this PR?

  • specialize map_extract key lookup for primitive, string, and binary key types using direct value comparison instead of array slicing
  • keep the generic fallback for unsupported key types
  • add a map_extract benchmark with representative cases

Benchmark

group                                                main                                    optimized
-----                                                ----                                    ---------
map_extract_1000_binary_found_last                   97.64   174.3±6.10ms        ? ?/sec     1.00  1784.9±63.47µs        ? ?/sec
map_extract_1000_binary_view_found_last              72.04   188.1±3.65ms        ? ?/sec     1.00      2.6±0.18ms        ? ?/sec
map_extract_1000_int32_found_last                    388.31   154.4±2.12ms        ? ?/sec    1.00   397.5±23.08µs        ? ?/sec
map_extract_1000_utf8_found_last                     80.58   173.5±6.90ms        ? ?/sec     1.00      2.2±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
map_extract_1000_utf8_found_middle                   79.85    84.7±2.36ms        ? ?/sec     1.00  1061.0±53.43µs        ? ?/sec
map_extract_1000_utf8_view_found_last                64.81   175.7±5.23ms        ? ?/sec     1.00      2.7±0.12ms        ? ?/sec

Are these changes tested?

Yes. slt passed, and benchmark coverage was added.

Are there any user-facing changes?

No.

@github-actions github-actions bot added sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt) functions Changes to functions implementation labels Mar 29, 2026
@rluvaton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

rluvaton commented Mar 29, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Damn

map_extract_1000_int32_found_last                    388.31   154.4±2.12ms        ? ?/sec    1.00   397.5±23.08µs        ? ?/sec

@rluvaton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

rluvaton commented Mar 29, 2026

Please create a seperate PR for the benchmarks so we can run then with comparison to this optimization

@lyne7-sc lyne7-sc mentioned this pull request Mar 30, 2026
Open
@lyne7-sc
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

lyne7-sc commented Mar 30, 2026

Please create a seperate PR for the benchmarks so we can run then with comparison to this optimization

@rluvaton thanks, opened a separate PR for the benchmarks here: #21251

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

functions Changes to functions implementation sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt)

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@lyne7-sc @rluvaton