reuse regex matcher in non FST index LIKE queries

[richardstartin]

The profile below was taken from one of our customer's deployments - very high allocation rates are observed in no-index LIKE queries, because of matcher construction.

This PR simply reuses the Matcher as it will never be used across threads at the segment level.

This decreases allocation significantly (2.5x) and may slightly decrease average query time.

before:

Benchmark                                                (_numRows)                                                                (_query)  (_scenario)  Mode  Cnt           Score            Error   Units
BenchmarkQueries.query                                      1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5         919.018 ±         14.737   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                       1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5         656.552 ±       1412.756  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5   806583564.800 ± 1735530730.138    B/op
BenchmarkQueries.query                                      1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5         758.236 ±         18.678   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                       1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5         762.000 ±       1639.664  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5   806583100.000 ± 1735530900.622    B/op
BenchmarkQueries.query                                      1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5         799.468 ±         17.653   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                       1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5         733.147 ±       1577.529  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5   806583204.000 ± 1735531021.166    B/op

after:

Benchmark                                            (_numRows)                                                                (_query)  (_scenario)  Mode  Cnt          Score            Error   Units
BenchmarkQueries.query                                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5        863.085 ±         31.335   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                   1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5        279.607 ±        601.640  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm              1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.001)  avgt    5  326550961.600 ±  702576606.964    B/op
BenchmarkQueries.query                                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5        759.623 ±         77.455   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                   1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5        307.396 ±        661.675  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm              1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'     EXP(0.5)  avgt    5  326583524.000 ±  702294555.871    B/op
BenchmarkQueries.query                                  1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5        753.004 ±         79.038   ms/op
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate                   1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5        308.145 ±        663.030  MB/sec
BenchmarkQueries.query:·gc.alloc.rate.norm              1500000  SELECT RAW_INT_COL FROM MyTable WHERE NO_INDEX_STRING_COL LIKE '%foo%'   EXP(0.999)  avgt    5  326583459.200 ±  702294795.237    B/op

[Jackie-Jiang]

Let's apply the same improvement to raw value based evaluator

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #8261 (9293b15) into master (e6330bb) will decrease coverage by 33.28%.
The diff coverage is 44.25%.

❗ Current head 9293b15 differs from pull request most recent head 4b5115d. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4b5115d to get more accurate results

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #8261       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage     64.06%   30.77%   -33.29%     
=============================================
  Files          1586     1619       +33     
  Lines         83399    85080     +1681     
  Branches      12641    12834      +193     
=============================================
- Hits          53427    26184    -27243     
- Misses        26129    56566    +30437     
+ Partials       3843     2330     -1513     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration1	28.86% <44.25%> (?)
integration2	27.63% <25.10%> (?)
unittests1	?
unittests2	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...er/api/resources/PinotInstanceRestletResource.java	18.81% <14.70%> (-36.75%)	⬇️
...ntroller/helix/core/PinotHelixResourceManager.java	41.32% <18.60%> (-20.87%)	⬇️
.../controller/helix/ControllerRequestURLBuilder.java	20.15% <33.33%> (-53.87%)	⬇️
...predicate/RegexpLikePredicateEvaluatorFactory.java	27.27% <50.00%> (ø)
...g/apache/pinot/common/utils/helix/HelixHelper.java	49.38% <64.58%> (+33.36%)	⬆️
...ache/pinot/common/metadata/ZKMetadataProvider.java	79.19% <80.00%> (+59.05%)	⬆️
...e/pinot/broker/broker/helix/BaseBrokerStarter.java	77.15% <88.88%> (+5.26%)	⬆️
...request/context/predicate/RegexpLikePredicate.java	63.15% <100.00%> (-3.51%)	⬇️
.../java/org/apache/pinot/spi/utils/BooleanUtils.java	0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%)	⬇️
...ava/org/apache/pinot/spi/config/table/FSTType.java	0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%)	⬇️
... and 1350 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e6330bb...4b5115d. Read the comment docs.

[richardstartin]

Do this lazily because it's an overhead when an FST index is available

[Jackie-Jiang]

The pattern can be accessed by multiple threads, so might be better to make it volatile or make it atomic swap?

[richardstartin]

It doesn't matter, the worst that can happen is it gets compiled more than once because the operation is idempotent.

[Jackie-Jiang]

The pattern can be accessed by multiple threads, so might be better to make it volatile or make it atomic swap?