feat: remove extra Rows from ReusableRows - #23802
Open
ariel-miculas wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Contributor
|
Hi @ariel-miculas Thank you for working on this. Can you look into the ci failures. |
Contributor
Author
|
@kumarUjjawal the CI failures are expected and the tests will pass once #23619 is merged |
Fixes: apache#23801 It will only work after apache#23619 is merged, until then test_round_robin_tie_breaker_success will fail: Error: Internal("Rows from RowCursorStream is still in use by consumer") test sorts::sort_preserving_merge::tests::test_round_robin_tie_breaker_success ... FAILED The failure is triggered by prev_cursors from SortPreservingMergeStream keeping the previous Cursor alive for round robin tie breaking purposes. The optimization from apache#23619 only keeps the last Row, so there's no longer a need to keep two Rows cached in ReusableRows.
ariel-miculas
force-pushed
the
remove-extra-rows-in-reusable-rows
branch
from
August 13, 2026 06:51
7f03b3b to
d50a09a
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #23802 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 81.13% 81.19% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 1112 1110 -2
Lines 386716 388734 +2018
Branches 386716 388734 +2018
==========================================
+ Hits 313765 315618 +1853
- Misses 54479 54529 +50
- Partials 18472 18587 +115 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Contributor
Author
|
All the tests have passed, updates to the reservation are not required since the spare |
Contributor
Author
|
@kumarUjjawal could you please have a look? |
kumarUjjawal
approved these changes
Aug 14, 2026
| @@ -96,36 +96,28 @@ impl FusedStreams { | |||
| /// A pair of `Arc<Rows>` that can be reused | |||
Contributor
|
run benchmark sort_tpch |
Dandandan
approved these changes
Aug 14, 2026
Contributor
|
Very nice, looks much better now |
|
🤖 Benchmark running (GKE) | trigger CPU Details (lscpu)Comparing remove-extra-rows-in-reusable-rows (12db718) to 186f96f (merge-base) diff Run configurationrun benchmark sort_tpchResults will be posted here when complete File an issue against this benchmark runner |
|
🤖 Benchmark completed (GKE) | trigger Instance: Comparing remove-extra-rows-in-reusable-rows (12db718) to 186f96f (merge-base) diff Run configurationrun benchmark sort_tpchCPU Details (lscpu)Details
Resource Usagesort_tpch — base (merge-base)
sort_tpch — branch
File an issue against this benchmark runner |
Contributor
Author
|
I think we need peak_memory per query to see the improvement. |
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
5 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?
Rationale for this change
This change reduces the peak allocated memory by removing the unnecessary Rows from being cached.
It will only work after #23619 is merged, until then test_round_robin_tie_breaker_success will fail:
Error: Internal("Rows from RowCursorStream is still in use by consumer") test sorts::sort_preserving_merge::tests::test_round_robin_tie_breaker_success ... FAILED
The failure is triggered by prev_cursors from SortPreservingMergeStream keeping the previous Cursor alive for round robin tie breaking purposes. The optimization from #23619 only keeps the last Row, so there's no longer a need to keep two Rows cached in ReusableRows.
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
There's an existing test that currenly fails with this change and it will pass once #23619 is merged
Are there any user-facing changes?
No