[Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
Eli Mesika
emesika at redhat.com
Sun Sep 1 13:29:06 UTC 2013
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> Sent: Sunday, September 1, 2013 2:47:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > To: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 1, 2013 10:35:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > > To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 7:17:32 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> > >
> > > Hi Eli,
> > >
> > > I wrote a quick benchmark to see if there is any difference when using
> > > STABLE
> > > modifier on functions running queries the way the engine does it (calling
> > > it
> > > from JDBC, one function in a single statement)
> > >
> > > with a stable function:
> > > create function getKakukk(_id int) returns VARCHAR STABLE as 'select val
> > > from
> > > kakukk where id = $1' language sql;
> > > and one not marked as stable
> > > create function getKakukk_(_id int) returns VARCHAR as 'select val from
> > > kakukk where id = $1' language sql;
> > > the table is this simple:
> > > create table kakukk(id int primary key, val varchar);
> > > and the only content is:
> > > insert into kakukk (id, val) values (1, 'bla bla bla');
> > >
> > > Now the benchmark code:
> > >
> > > package com.foobar;
> > >
> > > import java.sql.Connection;
> > > import java.sql.DriverManager;
> > > import java.sql.PreparedStatement;
> > > import java.sql.ResultSet;
> > > import java.sql.SQLException;
> > >
> > > import org.junit.After;
> > > import org.junit.Before;
> > > import org.junit.Test;
> > >
> > > public class SpeedTest {
> > >
> > > Connection connection;
> > >
> > > @Before
> > > public void connect() throws SQLException {
> > > connection =
> > > DriverManager.getConnection("jdbc:postgresql://localhost/stabletest",
> > > "engine", "engine");
> > > }
> > >
> > > @After
> > > public void disconnect() throws SQLException {
> > > connection.close();
> > > }
> > >
> > > private long measure(Runnable runnable, int times) {
> > > final long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
> > > for (int i = 0; i < times; i++) {
> > > runnable.run();
> > > }
> > > final long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
> > > return end - start;
> > > }
> > >
> > > public static class Select implements Runnable {
> > >
> > > public Select(PreparedStatement preparedStatement) {
> > > super();
> > > this.preparedStatement = preparedStatement;
> > > }
> > >
> > > final PreparedStatement preparedStatement;
> > >
> > > public void run() {
> > > try (
> > > ResultSet resultSet =
> > > preparedStatement.executeQuery();)
> > > {
> > > while (resultSet.next()) {
> > > // nothing, just next
> > > }
> > > } catch (SQLException e) {
> > > // TODO Auto-generated catch block
> > > e.printStackTrace();
> > > }
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > @Test
> > > public void performTest() throws SQLException {
> > > for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> > > try (
> > > PreparedStatement stable =
> > > connection.prepareStatement("select getKakukk(1)");
> > > PreparedStatement notStable =
> > > connection.prepareStatement("select getKakukk_(1)");)
> > > {
> > > System.out.println("STABLE: " + measure(new
> > > Select(stable),
> > > 100000));
> > > System.out.println("not STABLE: " + measure(new
> > > Select(notStable), 100000));
> > > System.out.println("---");
> > >
> > > }
> > > }
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > The results are very similar, seemingly no difference at all.
> > > Therefore, it seems we do not need those STABLE markers for performance
> > > reasons.
> >
> > Please refer to
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/xfunc-volatility.html
> > It says :
> >
> > "For best optimization results, you should label your functions with the
> > strictest volatility category that is valid for them."
>
> I am sure the postgres guys did not mean "without even thinking about it" :)
> The way the enginge is using these functions, it will not improve
> performance, which is not a problem. The problem in my opinion is that more
> requirements increase the time needed for review procedure, which is already
> quite lengthy. This new requirement does not seem to have any benefit. If we
> want to improve the development process then we should not have requirements
> that do not come with benefits.
I totally disagree, I think the opposite , if this will not be a clear rule of thumb , it will be used incorrectly.
Thinking on each SP if you will benefit or not in terms of performance if you use those keywords will increase the review time when any reviewer will need to think if he needs that or not.
I don't think that adding a word to the SP will affect development or review time , it should be like you are writing the word FUNCTION for a SP definition and will become a habit.
I am against complicated rules like "add those keywords whenever you like" , if the documentations says a clear instruction to use those keywords in certain circumstances, that's what I would exactly do and recommend to others.
Thanks
>
> Best regards,
> Laszlo
>
> >
> > So , using STABLE , IMMUTABLE , STRICT is mandatory from now on.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Eli
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Laszlo
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:02:18 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 11:45:14 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 11:40:27 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Eli,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Most of the functions that we have in the DB are doing very simple
> > > > > > jobs
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > run a query, insert/update and I see that now you have all QUERY
> > > > > > functions
> > > > > > as STABLE.
> > > > > > My questions:
> > > > > > Is this required for new functions from now on?
> > > > > Yes and a email asking that was posted to engine_devel
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is this done in order to improve performance?
> > > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > Do you have any documents/benchmarks on how and why does this improve
> > > > performance?
> > > > STABLE functions should improve performance if they return the same
> > > > result
> > > > for the same parameters in the same statement.
> > > > E.g. if you have a stable function like "select foo(x) from y" then the
> > > > function can be invoked only once to evaluate each distinct value of
> > > > y.x
> > > > -
> > > > this is kind of useful
> > > > Functions running queries for the ovirt engine are typically invoked
> > > > from
> > > > client side, therefore they are only ivoked once from the parameters
> > > > list
> > > > and therefore will be only executed once for that single statement.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > > Laszlo
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com>
> > > > > > > To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 11:22:20 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: [Engine-devel] Opimizing Postgres Stored Procedures
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I had merged the following patch
> > > > > > > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/17962/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This patch introduce usage of the IMMUTABLE, STABLE and STRICT
> > > > > > > keywords
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > order to boost performance of the Postgres SPs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please make sure that your current/and future DB scripts applied
> > > > > > > that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Volatility
> > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > * A function should be marked as IMMUTABLE if it doesn't change
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > database,
> > > > > > > and if it doesn't perform any lookups (even for database
> > > > > > > configuration
> > > > > > > values) during its operation.
> > > > > > > * A function should be marked STABLE if it doesn't change the
> > > > > > > database,
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > might perform lookups (IMMUTABLE is preferable if function meets
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > requirements).
> > > > > > > * A function doesn't need to be marked VOLATILE, because that's
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > default.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > STRICTNESS
> > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > A function should be marked STRICT if it should return NULL when
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > passed
> > > > > > > a NULL argument, and then the function won't even be called if it
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > indeed
> > > > > > > passed a NULL argument.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am available for any questions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eli
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > Engine-devel at ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
More information about the Devel
mailing list