1 commit

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Brian Brazil	767fa704b6	Load only some offsets into the symbol table into memory. ... Rather than keeping the entire symbol table in memory, keep every nth offset and walk from there to the entry we need. This ends up slightly slower, ~360ms per 1M series returned from PostingsForMatchers which is not much considering the rest of the CPU such a query would go on to use. Make LabelValues use the postings tables, rather than having to do symbol lookups. Use yoloString, as PostingsForMatchers doesn't need the strings to stick around and adjust the API call to keep the Querier open until it's all marshalled. Remove allocatedSymbols memory optimisation, we no longer keep all the symbol strings in heap memory. Remove LabelValuesFor and LabelIndices, they're dead code. Ensure we've still tests for label indices, and add missing test that we can work with old V1 Format index files. PostingForMatchers performance is slightly better, with a big drop in allocation counts due to using yoloString for LabelValues: benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1"-4 36698 36681 -0.05% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j="foo"-4 522786 560887 +7.29% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/j="foo",n="1"-4 511652 537680 +5.09% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j!="foo"-4 522102 564239 +8.07% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".*"-4 113689911 111795919 -1.67% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".+"-4 135825572 132871085 -2.18% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~""-4 40782628 38038181 -6.73% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i!=""-4 31267869 29194327 -6.63% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",j="foo"-4 112733329 111568823 -1.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",i!="2",j="foo"-4 112868153 111232029 -1.45% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!=""-4 31338257 29349446 -6.35% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!="",j="foo"-4 32054482 29972436 -6.50% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",j="foo"-4 136504654 133968442 -1.86% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~"1.+",j="foo"-4 27960350 27264997 -2.49% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!="2",j="foo"-4 136765564 133860724 -2.12% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!~"2.*",j="foo"-4 163714583 159453668 -2.60% benchmark old allocs new allocs delta BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1"-4 6 6 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j="foo"-4 11 11 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/j="foo",n="1"-4 11 11 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j!="foo"-4 17 15 -11.76% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".*"-4 100012 12 -99.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".+"-4 200040 100040 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~""-4 200045 100045 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i!=""-4 200041 100041 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",j="foo"-4 100017 17 -99.98% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",i!="2",j="foo"-4 100023 23 -99.98% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!=""-4 200046 100046 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!="",j="foo"-4 200050 100050 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",j="foo"-4 200049 100049 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~"1.+",j="foo"-4 111150 11150 -89.97% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!="2",j="foo"-4 200055 100055 -49.99% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!~"2.*",j="foo"-4 311238 111238 -64.26% benchmark old bytes new bytes delta BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1"-4 296 296 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j="foo"-4 424 424 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/j="foo",n="1"-4 424 424 +0.00% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",j!="foo"-4 552 1544 +179.71% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".*"-4 1600482 1606125 +0.35% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~".+"-4 17259065 17264709 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i=~""-4 17259150 17264780 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/i!=""-4 17259048 17264680 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",j="foo"-4 1600610 1606242 +0.35% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".*",i!="2",j="foo"-4 1600813 1606434 +0.35% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!=""-4 17259176 17264808 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i!="",j="foo"-4 17259304 17264936 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",j="foo"-4 17259333 17264965 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~"1.+",j="foo"-4 3142628 3148262 +0.18% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!="2",j="foo"-4 17259509 17265141 +0.03% BenchmarkPostingsForMatchers/Block/n="1",i=~".+",i!~"2.*",j="foo"-4 20405680 20416944 +0.06% However overall Select performance is down and involves more allocs, due to having to do more than a simple map lookup to resolve a symbol and that all the strings returned are allocated: benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1of1000000-4 506092636 862678244 +70.46% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10of1000000-4 505638968 860917636 +70.26% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100of1000000-4 505229450 882150048 +74.60% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000of1000000-4 515905414 862241115 +67.13% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10000of1000000-4 516785354 874841110 +69.29% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100000of1000000-4 540742808 907030187 +67.74% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000000of1000000-4 815224288 1181236903 +44.90% benchmark old allocs new allocs delta BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1of1000000-4 4000020 6000020 +50.00% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10of1000000-4 4000038 6000038 +50.00% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100of1000000-4 4000218 6000218 +50.00% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000of1000000-4 4002018 6002018 +49.97% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10000of1000000-4 4020018 6020018 +49.75% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100000of1000000-4 4200018 6200018 +47.62% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000000of1000000-4 6000018 8000019 +33.33% benchmark old bytes new bytes delta BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1of1000000-4 176001468 227201476 +29.09% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10of1000000-4 176002620 227202628 +29.09% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100of1000000-4 176014140 227214148 +29.09% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000of1000000-4 176129340 227329348 +29.07% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/10000of1000000-4 177281340 228481348 +28.88% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/100000of1000000-4 188801340 240001348 +27.12% BenchmarkQuerierSelect/Block/1000000of1000000-4 304001340 355201616 +16.84% Signed-off-by: Brian Brazil <brian.brazil@robustperception.io>	2019-12-17 18:56:58 +00:00