And sidebar. I've been looking at RoaringBitmap, and besides a really awesome name, pretty impressive stuff there.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 1:13 PM Alex Petrov <[email protected]> wrote: > Good point! > > From what I understand even though there’s “loop” in the name it has > preceded a current wave of agentic looping. In other words, they use same > methodology one would when searching for performance improvements: > measurement profiling hypothesis etc., and then go through multiple > evaluation stages. > > Contributions are not coming with any conditions: agent just posts a > patch, and all associated documentation and hypothesis is freely available. > > From what I understand, mentioning that X has found an issue in an open > source project is ok (similar to how a researcher can claim a found issue); > that of course can’t imply that Cassandra logo can be used in vendor > materials. Thank you for pointing that out. > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2026, at 9:55 PM, C. Scott Andreas wrote: > > I’m supportive and not aware of any blockers. > > One consideration on approach: David has done some experimentation with > loop-based optimization. His work demonstrates a lot of promise, but with a > caveat that as the loop approaches optimality the complexity of the patch > can increase at a rate that outpaces its value. I’d be curious how this > approach handles that tradeoff. > > And one for the project: if use of the software creates any obligation for > Apache Cassandra such as referenceability in the vendor’s press materials > etc., that would need to be discussed and voted on by the PMC prior to > creating any such obligation. > > — > Mobile > > On Jul 8, 2026, at 5:59 AM, Alex Petrov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > A friend of mine is building Perfloop [1]; the way they describe it, > "closed loop performance engineering". They already have several upstream > OSS merges, including two in parquet-go [2] and one in > RoaringBitmap/roaring [3], all benchmark-verified. > > I was curious if they can find anything in Cassandra, so asked them to try > it against our repo, and they've found a bunch of performance improvements, > many of which seem to be quite easy to review and verify. All of them come > with a finding, benchmark, a patch, and verification of an improvement, > which is pretty useful for a reviewer. > > I've looked over the issues, and will be reviewing and committing some of > them. Is there anything that prevents us from committing the patches that > were fully LLM-authored, assuming contents are solid? > > --Alex > > [1] https://perfloop.ai/ > [2] https://github.com/parquet-go/parquet-go/pull/550 > [3] https://github.com/RoaringBitmap/roaring/pull/532 > > >
