Try and improve allocation-happy code paths#6337
Draft
Conversation
github-actions
bot
removed
the
action/benchmark
Contributor
Benchmarks: Random AccessSummary
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=1 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: FineWeb NVMeSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: TPC-DS SF=1 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=1 on S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=10 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: FineWeb S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: Statistical and Population GeneticsSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=10 on S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: Clickbench on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Contributor
Benchmarks: CompressionSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Merging this PR will improve performance by 36.39%
Performance Changes
Comparing 
Footnotes
|
robert3005
reviewed
Feb 6, 2026
robert3005
reviewed
Feb 6, 2026
AdamGS
force-pushed
the
adamg/reduce-allocations-some-cases
branch
from
c235d20 to
531a071
Compare
github-actions
bot
removed
the
action/benchmark
Contributor
🚨🚨🚨❌❌❌ SQL BENCHMARK FAILED ❌❌❌🚨🚨🚨Benchmark |
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
AdamGS
force-pushed
the
adamg/reduce-allocations-some-cases
branch
from
0fda89b to
015b5d7
Compare
github-actions
bot
removed
the
action/benchmark-sql
Contributor
Author
|
moving the filter piece into a different PR so I can try and measure a bigger thing |
Signed-off-by: Adam Gutglick <adam@spiraldb.com>
AdamGS
force-pushed
the
adamg/reduce-allocations-some-cases
branch
from
1d9c33f to
8172fcb
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
The codspeed improvement here is real 🥳, like 20% of those benchmarks was just formatting the names of the chunks. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Using
dhat, identified these two code paths as heavy allocators, running the full tpch benchmark.Using the existing iterator when filtering instead of allocating a Vec saves about 2GB of memory allocation (around 1.6% of all memory allocated), which happens in a tiny amount of allocations (0.02%).Moving to a separate PR, I want to try and make a bigger change and be able to measure it.nth_child(should just bechild?) was just another offender that was easy to experiment with, it doesn't allocate a lot of data but it does save ~0.6% of all allocations.