Skip to content

Remove duckdbfs#8468

Draft
myrrc wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
myrrc/remove-duckdbfs
Draft

Remove duckdbfs#8468
myrrc wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
myrrc/remove-duckdbfs

Conversation

@myrrc

@myrrc myrrc commented Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Duckdb fs implementation for Vortex suffers from glob expansion issues and performance issue, so it's turned off by default.
We don't want to call into duckdb's blocking IO inside out event loop but instead allow duckdb to do IO for us.
As first step, remove duckdbfs implementation

@myrrc myrrc added changelog/feature A new feature ext/duckdb Relates to the DuckDB integration labels Jun 17, 2026
Signed-off-by: Mikhail Kot <mikhail@spiraldb.com>
@myrrc myrrc force-pushed the myrrc/remove-duckdbfs branch from fa938c8 to e41bcc7 Compare June 17, 2026 14:45
@myrrc myrrc marked this pull request as ready for review June 17, 2026 14:45
@myrrc myrrc requested review from a team and gatesn June 17, 2026 14:45
@myrrc myrrc marked this pull request as draft June 17, 2026 15:09
@myrrc myrrc linked an issue Jun 17, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request
@codspeed-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 21.22%

⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected

Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.

For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.

⚡ 5 improved benchmarks
❌ 14 regressed benchmarks
✅ 1502 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 71 skipped benchmarks1

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
Simulation slice_empty_vortex 368.3 ns 2,657.8 ns -86.14%
Simulation chunked_bool_canonical_into[(1000, 10)] 20.3 µs 35.7 µs -43.24%
Simulation slice_vortex_buffer[1024] 871.4 ns 1,305.8 ns -33.27%
Simulation slice_vortex_buffer[16384] 871.4 ns 1,305.8 ns -33.27%
Simulation slice_vortex_buffer[2048] 871.4 ns 1,305.8 ns -33.27%
Simulation slice_vortex_buffer[128] 871.4 ns 1,305.8 ns -33.27%
Simulation slice_vortex_buffer[65536] 871.4 ns 1,305.8 ns -33.27%
Simulation chunked_varbinview_canonical_into[(1000, 10)] 162.2 µs 198.1 µs -18.09%
Simulation chunked_varbinview_into_canonical[(1000, 10)] 177.7 µs 214 µs -16.98%
Simulation search_index_below_min_chunked 1.3 ms 1.5 ms -13.61%
Simulation search_index_mixed_out_of_range_chunked 1.3 ms 1.5 ms -13.3%
Simulation count_i32_clustered_nulls 47 µs 53.9 µs -12.83%
Simulation search_index_full_range_random_chunked 1.4 ms 1.6 ms -12.06%
Simulation chunked_varbinview_canonical_into[(100, 100)] 273.2 µs 308.8 µs -11.53%
Simulation take_10k_random 255.8 µs 197.7 µs +29.39%
Simulation take_10k_contiguous 276.3 µs 218.1 µs +26.66%
Simulation patched_take_10k_contiguous_patches 291 µs 232.1 µs +25.39%
Simulation patched_take_10k_random 303 µs 244 µs +24.18%
WallTime cuda/bitpacked_u8/unpack/3bw[100M] 352 µs 300.3 µs +17.22%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.


Comparing myrrc/remove-duckdbfs (e41bcc7) with develop (85aad72)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 71 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports.

  2. No successful run was found on develop (0ed06b3) during the generation of this report, so 85aad72 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.

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

Labels

changelog/feature A new feature ext/duckdb Relates to the DuckDB integration

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Performance regressions in duckdbfs

1 participant