Improve coalesce and concat performance for views#7614
Merged
Dandandan merged 20 commits intoapache:mainfrom Jun 7, 2025
Merged
Improve coalesce and concat performance for views#7614Dandandan merged 20 commits intoapache:mainfrom
coalesce and concat performance for views#7614Dandandan merged 20 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
Dandandan
force-pushed
the
coalesce_improvements
branch
from
9ff57e5 to
b3d4337
Compare
Dandandan
force-pushed
the
coalesce_improvements
branch
from
b3d4337 to
c3648f4
Compare
Dandandan
changed the title
gc_string_view_batch performance
Dandandan
changed the title
gc_string_view_batch performancecoalesce performance
Dandandan
changed the title
coalesce performancecoalesce and concat performance for views
Contributor
Author
|
@alamb FYI |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR targets performance improvements for view concatenation and coalescing in Arrow by specializing functions and reducing unnecessary memory copies. Key changes include:
- Adding specialized concatenation functions (concat_byte_view and concat_string_view) for view types.
- Refactoring gc_string_view_batch to take ownership of RecordBatches to avoid redundant cloning.
- Updating the GenericByteViewBuilder implementation to use a vector-based buffer instead of a BufferBuilder for better performance and clarity.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| arrow-select/src/concat.rs | Introduces optimized concat functions for Utf8View and BinaryView. |
| arrow-select/src/coalesce.rs | Refactors gc_string_view_batch for improved efficiency and updates associated tests. |
| arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs | Replaces BufferBuilder with Vec for views and updates related debug output. |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (3)
arrow-select/src/concat.rs:89
- Consider adding inline documentation for the concat_byte_view function to explain its purpose, expected input, and output behavior.
fn concat_byte_view(arrays: &[&dyn Array]) -> Result<ArrayRef, ArrowError> {
arrow-select/src/coalesce.rs:305
- Add a comment to explain the safety guarantees around using the unsafe StringViewArray::new_unchecked call and why it is acceptable in this context.
let gc_string = unsafe {
arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs:449
- Update the debug field label from "views_builder" to "views_buffer" so that the debug output accurately reflects the name of the underlying variable.
.field("views_builder", &self.views_buffer)
Contributor
|
LOVE IT! |
Contributor
|
🤖 |
alamb
approved these changes
Jun 6, 2025
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a thing of Beauty @Dandandan
I kicked off some other benchmarks just to be sure and left some small potential improvements, but I also think this is better than what is currently on main so we could merge it as is and keep improving as a follow on
| /// using [`GenericByteViewBuilder::try_append_view`] | ||
| pub struct GenericByteViewBuilder<T: ByteViewType + ?Sized> { | ||
| views_builder: BufferBuilder<u128>, | ||
| views_buffer: Vec<u128>, |
| self.flush_in_progress(); | ||
| self.completed.extend(array.data_buffers().iter().cloned()); | ||
|
|
||
| if self.completed.is_empty() { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This checks completed.is_empty after pushing new data buffers, which I think means the fast path will never be taken. I think the check could be done prior to calling self.completed.extend and improve performance
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I couldn't resist and tried the following change locally and saw some additional improvements in concat but also some slowdowns with entirely inlined views, which I don't understand 🤔
diff --git a/arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs b/arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs
index 1e06cd7698..3936ca06d4 100644
--- a/arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs
+++ b/arrow-array/src/builder/generic_bytes_view_builder.rs
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ impl<T: ByteViewType + ?Sized> GenericByteViewBuilder<T> {
/// growing buffer size exponentially from 8KB up to 2MB. The
/// first buffer allocated is 8KB, then 16KB, then 32KB, etc up to 2MB.
///
- /// If this method is used, any new buffers allocated are
+ /// If this method is used, any new buffers allocated are
/// exactly this size. This can be useful for advanced users
/// that want to control the memory usage and buffer count.
///
@@ -210,9 +210,11 @@ impl<T: ByteViewType + ?Sized> GenericByteViewBuilder<T> {
/// and add the (adapted) views.
pub fn append_array(&mut self, array: &GenericByteViewArray<T>) {
self.flush_in_progress();
+ let update_views = !(self.completed.is_empty() || array.data_buffers().is_empty());
+
self.completed.extend(array.data_buffers().iter().cloned());
- if self.completed.is_empty() {
+ if update_views {
self.views_buffer.extend_from_slice(array.views());
} else {
let starting_buffer = self.completed.len() as u32;group coalesce_improvements coalesce_improvements_fix
----- --------------------- -------------------------
concat utf8_view max_str_len=128 null_density=0 1.53 80.4±0.42µs ? ?/sec 1.00 52.5±2.85µs ? ?/sec
concat utf8_view max_str_len=128 null_density=0.2 1.51 86.4±0.34µs ? ?/sec 1.00 57.3±2.97µs ? ?/sec
concat utf8_view max_str_len=20 null_density=0 1.58 80.2±0.36µs ? ?/sec 1.00 50.6±2.33µs ? ?/sec
concat utf8_view max_str_len=20 null_density=0.2 1.65 98.9±0.36µs ? ?/sec 1.00 59.9±2.19µs ? ?/sec
concat utf8_view all_inline max_str_len=12 null_density=0 1.00 40.6±2.82µs ? ?/sec 1.94 78.7±1.18µs ? ?/sec
concat utf8_view all_inline max_str_len=12 null_density=0.2 1.00 53.9±2.78µs ? ?/sec 1.95 105.1±0.26µs ? ?/sec
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be:
@@ -210,9 +210,11 @@ impl<T: ByteViewType + ?Sized> GenericByteViewBuilder<T> {
/// and add the (adapted) views.
pub fn append_array(&mut self, array: &GenericByteViewArray<T>) {
self.flush_in_progress();
+ let keep_views = self.completed.is_empty() || array.data_buffers().is_empty();
+
self.completed.extend(array.data_buffers().iter().cloned());
- if self.completed.is_empty() {
+ if keep_views {
self.views_buffer.extend_from_slice(array.views());
} else {
let starting_buffer = self.completed.len() as u32;
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For me this is a all-positive change 🎉 I really like the >2x improvement on inlined views.
concat utf8_view all_inline max_str_len=12 null_density=0
time: [25.775 µs 27.046 µs 28.546 µs]
change: [−55.148% −53.600% −51.725%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 23 outliers among 100 measurements (23.00%)
7 (7.00%) low mild
5 (5.00%) high mild
11 (11.00%) high severe
concat utf8_view max_str_len=20 null_density=0
time: [53.475 µs 53.934 µs 54.689 µs]
change: [−7.1979% −6.4937% −5.5943%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 7 outliers among 100 measurements (7.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
3 (3.00%) high mild
3 (3.00%) high severe
concat utf8_view max_str_len=128 null_density=0
time: [52.999 µs 53.106 µs 53.245 µs]
change: [−7.0948% −6.6147% −6.0319%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 15 outliers among 100 measurements (15.00%)
7 (7.00%) high mild
8 (8.00%) high severe
concat utf8_view all_inline max_str_len=12 null_density=0.2
time: [25.532 µs 25.741 µs 25.943 µs]
change: [−56.519% −56.108% −55.710%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
8 (8.00%) low mild
3 (3.00%) high mild
concat utf8_view max_str_len=20 null_density=0.2
time: [56.062 µs 56.342 µs 56.688 µs]
change: [−6.1050% −5.3513% −4.6591%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 5 outliers among 100 measurements (5.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
4 (4.00%) high severe
concat utf8_view max_str_len=128 null_density=0.2
time: [55.406 µs 55.623 µs 55.891 µs]
change: [−6.0536% −5.4045% −4.8059%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 14 outliers among 100 measurements (14.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild
12 (12.00%) high severe
Contributor
|
🤖: Benchmark completed Details
|
Contributor
|
🤖 |
Contributor
|
🤖: Benchmark completed Details
|
Contributor
|
🤖 |
Contributor
🤔 seems there is no |
Contributor
|
I also ran this PR with a new concat benchmark in And it also shows pretty sweet gains |
Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <andrew@nerdnetworks.org>
3 tasks
Dandandan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2025
# Which issue does this PR close? - Related to #7614 # Rationale for this change We expect #7614 to improve concat performance, but we don't have any concat benchmarks for StringViewArray Let's fix that # What changes are included in this PR? 1. Add a `concat` benchmark for StringViewArray # Are there any user-facing changes? No this is an internal benchmarking tool only
Contributor
|
🤖 |
alamb
reviewed
Jun 6, 2025
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking great -- I kicked off some more tests
| .iter() | ||
| fn gc_string_view_batch(batch: RecordBatch) -> RecordBatch { | ||
| let (schema, columns, num_rows) = batch.into_parts(); | ||
| let new_columns: Vec<ArrayRef> = columns |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know if it matters but in #7620 I simply modified the existing Vec rather than collecting into a new one to save maybe an allocation
for mut c in columns.iter_mut() {
...
}
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
AFAIK there is a Rust compiler optimization that will reuse a Vec allocation if using into_iter / collect (on owned Vec) 🤔
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is one of the reasons I think using Vec arrow-rs makes sense, there are many optimizations that are not feasible to implement in arrow-rs.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I think using Vec is a great idea - it is both simpler and as can be seen by this PR often quite a bit faster
| }) | ||
| .collect(); | ||
|
|
||
| let buffers = if buffer.is_empty() { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the only way this could happen is if ideal_buffer_size is zero, right? In that case we could make a more efficient inner loop that simply copied the views without checking length, etc
if ideal_buffer_size == 0 {
// just reuse views as is...
}
Contributor
|
🤖: Benchmark completed Details
|
Contributor
|
🤖 |
Contributor
|
🤖: Benchmark completed Details
|
Contributor
|
🤖 |
Contributor
|
🤖: Benchmark completed Details
|
tlm365
reviewed
Jun 7, 2025
Comment on lines
+291
to
+312
| let views: Vec<u128> = s | ||
| .views() | ||
| .as_ref() | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .cloned() | ||
| .map(|v| { | ||
| let mut b: ByteView = ByteView::from(v); | ||
|
|
||
| if b.length > 12 { | ||
| let offset = buffer.len() as u32; | ||
| buffer.extend_from_slice( | ||
| buffers[b.buffer_index as usize] | ||
| .get(b.offset as usize..b.offset as usize + b.length as usize) | ||
| .expect("Invalid buffer slice"), | ||
| ); | ||
| b.offset = offset; | ||
| b.buffer_index = 0; // Set buffer index to 0, as we only have one buffer | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| b.into() | ||
| }) | ||
| .collect(); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm curious it is better if implement like this:
let mut views = Vec::with_capacity(s.views().len());
for &v in s.views().as_ref() {
let mut b: ByteView = ByteView::from(v);
if b.length > 12 {
...
}
views.push(b.into());
}vector pre-allocates and no clone 🤔
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No that is generally worse - .iter().collect() on rust core types optimize to better code:
- it knows the exact final length based on slice and does some extra optimizations based on that (
TrustedLenhttps://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.TrustedLen.html) pushgenerally needs to check whether the item fits capacity on each call (so adds some branching).
the cloned() you see on iter().cloned() will generally not make a difference on primitive types for the generated code.
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks for the reviews @alamb - let's continue making it faster! |
alamb
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 7, 2025
#7623) This reverts commit 7739a83. # Which issue does this PR close? # Rationale for this change I found this errors in DataFusion (see apache/datafusion#16249 (comment)), so let's revert it and find the error. # What changes are included in this PR? # Are there any user-facing changes?
Dandandan
added a commit
to Dandandan/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 7, 2025
…apache#7614)" (apache#7623)" This reverts commit da461c8.
alamb
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 8, 2025
#7625) … (#7614)" (#7623)" This reverts commit da461c8. This adds a test and fix for the wrong index issue. I also verified the change for DataFusion (and benchmarks show notable improvements). # Which issue does this PR close? Closes #NNN. # Rationale for this change # What changes are included in this PR? # Are there any user-facing changes?
Contributor
|
🤖 |
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
3 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.
Which issue does this PR close?
coalesceandconcatfor views #7615coalescekernel andBatchCoalescerfor statefully combining selected b…atches: #7597Rationale for this change
Improve performance of
gc_string_view_batchWhat changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?
no