feat[btrblocks]: add a dynamic btr blocks compressor#6207
feat[btrblocks]: add a dynamic btr blocks compressor#6207joseph-isaacs merged 17 commits intodevelopfrom
Conversation
Merging this PR will not alter performance
Comparing Footnotes
|
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=1 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: Random AccessSummary
|
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=1 on S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: TPC-DS SF=1 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=10 on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: FineWeb S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: Statistical and Population GeneticsSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: TPC-H SF=10 on S3Summary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: Clickbench on NVMESummary
Detailed Results Table
|
Benchmarks: CompressionSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
a054b7a to
68c8d87
Compare
Signed-off-by: Joe Isaacs <joe.isaacs@live.co.uk>
68c8d87 to
1536f8a
Compare
Benchmarks: FineWeb NVMeSummary
Detailed Results Table
|
| /// This struct is passed through recursive compression calls to specify | ||
| /// which schemes should be excluded at each level. | ||
| #[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, Default)] | ||
| pub struct Excludes<'a> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it might be nice to make this owned and then this is what gets passed into the schemes? needing to build new_excludes is a bit messy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wanted to avoid the move/alloc? What would you do instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yea that's fair. maybe we can flup but i think having a stack-allocated set might clean things up here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what do you mean? This allows that?
|
approach here looks fine overall |
|
Yep, should be easier to do that in a follow up |
Signed-off-by: Joe Isaacs <joe.isaacs@live.co.uk>
No description provided.