I think I figured it out! The dictionaryByteSize == 0 was a red herring; I was looking at an IntegerDictionaryValuesWriter for an empty column rather than my high-cardinality column. Your analysis of the situation was right--it was just that in the first page, there weren't enough distinct values to pass the check.
I wonder if we could maybe make this value configurable per-column? Either: - A desired ratio of distinct values / total values, on a scale of 0-1.0 - Number of pages to check for compression before falling back Let me know what you think! Best, Claire On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 9:37 AM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't understand why you get encodedSize == 1, dictionaryByteSize == 0 > and rawSize == 0 in the first page check. It seems that the page does not > have any meaning values. Could you please check how many values are > written before the page check? > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12 AM Claire McGinty < > claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hey Gang, > > > > Thanks for the followup! I see what you're saying where it's sometimes > just > > bad luck with what ends up in the first page. The intuition seems like a > > larger page size should produce a better encoding in this case... I > updated > > my branch > > < > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/compare/master...clairemcginty:parquet-mr:dict-size-repro?expand=1 > > > > > to > > add a test with a page size/dict page size of 10MB and am seeing the same > > failure, though. > > > > Something seems kind of odd actually -- when I stepped through the test I > > added w/ debugger, it falls back after invoking isCompressionSatisfying > > with encodedSize == 1, dictionaryByteSize == 0 and rawSize == 0; 1 + 0 < > 1 > > returns true. (You can also see this in the System.out logs I added, in > the > > branch's GHA run logs). This doesn't seem right to me -- does > > isCompressionSatsifying need an extra check to make sure the > > dictionary isn't empty? > > > > Also, thanks, Aaron! I got into this while running some micro-benchmarks > on > > Parquet reads when various dictionary/bloom filter/encoding options are > > configured. Happy to share out when I'm done. > > > > Best, > > Claire > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:06 PM Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the investigation! > > > > > > I think the check below makes sense for a single page: > > > @Override > > > public boolean isCompressionSatisfying(long rawSize, long > encodedSize) > > { > > > return (encodedSize + dictionaryByteSize) < rawSize; > > > } > > > > > > The problem is that the fallback check is only performed on the first > > page. > > > In the first page, all values in that page may be distinct, so it will > > > unlikely > > > pass the isCompressionSatisfying check. > > > > > > Best, > > > Gang > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 5:04 AM Aaron Niskode-Dossett > > > <aniskodedoss...@etsy.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > Claire, thank you for your research and examples on this topic, I've > > > > learned a lot. My hunch is that your change would be a good one, but > > I'm > > > > not an expert (and more to the point, not a committer). I'm looking > > > > forward to learning more as this discussion continues. > > > > > > > > Thank you again, Aaron > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:48 PM Claire McGinty < > > > claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I created a quick branch > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/compare/master...clairemcginty:parquet-mr:dict-size-repro?expand=1 > > > > > > > > > > > to reproduce what I'm seeing -- the test shows that an Int column > > with > > > > > cardinality 100 successfully results in a dict encoding, but an int > > > > column > > > > > with cardinality 10,000 falls back and doesn't create a dict > > encoding. > > > > This > > > > > seems like a low threshold given the 1MB dictionary page size, so I > > > just > > > > > wanted to check whether this is expected or not :) > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Claire > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:35 AM Claire McGinty < > > > > claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, just wanted to follow up on this! > > > > > > > > > > > > I ran a debugger to find out why my column wasn't ending up with > a > > > > > > dictionary encoding and it turns out that even though > > > > > > DictionaryValuesWriter#shouldFallback() > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/master/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/dictionary/DictionaryValuesWriter.java#L117 > > > > > > > > > > > > always returned false (dictionaryByteSize was always less than my > > > > > > configured page size), > > DictionaryValuesWriter#isCompressionSatisfying > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/master/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/dictionary/DictionaryValuesWriter.java#L125 > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > what was causing Parquet to switch > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/master/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/fallback/FallbackValuesWriter.java#L75 > > > > > > > > > > > > back to the fallback, non-dict writer. > > > > > > > > > > > > From what I can tell, this check compares the total byte size of > > > > > > *every* element with the byte size of each *distinct* element as > a > > > kind > > > > > of > > > > > > proxy for encoding efficiency.... however, it seems strange that > > this > > > > > check > > > > > > can cause the writer to fall back even if the total encoded dict > > size > > > > is > > > > > > far below the configured dictionary page size. Out of curiosity, > I > > > > > modified > > > > > > DictionaryValuesWriter#isCompressionSatisfying > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/master/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/dictionary/DictionaryValuesWriter.java#L125 > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > also check whether total byte size was less than dictionary max > > size > > > > and > > > > > > re-ran my Parquet write with a local snapshot, and my file size > > > dropped > > > > > 50%. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Claire > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 9:16 AM Claire McGinty < > > > > > claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Oh, interesting! I'm setting it via the > > > > > >> ParquetWriter#withDictionaryPageSize method, and I do see the > > > overall > > > > > file > > > > > >> size increasing when I bump the value. I'll look into it a bit > > more > > > -- > > > > > it > > > > > >> would be helpful for some cases where the # unique values in a > > > column > > > > is > > > > > >> just over the size limit. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> - Claire > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:54 AM Micah Kornfield < > > > > emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> I'll note there is also a check for encoding effectiveness [1] > > that > > > > > could > > > > > >>> come into play but I'd guess that isn't the case here. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> [1] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/9b5a962df3007009a227ef421600197531f970a5/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/dictionary/DictionaryValuesWriter.java#L124 > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:51 AM Micah Kornfield < > > > > emkornfi...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > I'm glad I was looking at the right setting for dictionary > > size. > > > I > > > > > just > > > > > >>> >> tried it out with 10x, 50x, and even total file size, > though, > > > and > > > > > >>> still am > > > > > >>> >> not seeing a dictionary get created. Is it possible it's > > bounded > > > > by > > > > > >>> file > > > > > >>> >> page size or some other layout option that I need to bump as > > > well? > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > Sorry I'm less familiar with parquet-mr, hopefully someone > else > > > to > > > > > >>> chime > > > > > >>> > in. If I had to guess, maybe somehow the config value isn't > > > making > > > > > it > > > > > >>> to > > > > > >>> > the writer (but there could also be something else at play). > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:33 AM Claire McGinty < > > > > > >>> claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>> > wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> >> Thanks so much, Micah! > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> I think you are using the right setting, but maybe it is > > > possible > > > > > the > > > > > >>> >> > strings are still exceeding the threshold (perhaps > > increasing > > > it > > > > > by > > > > > >>> 50x > > > > > >>> >> or > > > > > >>> >> > more to verify) > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> I'm glad I was looking at the right setting for dictionary > > > size. I > > > > > >>> just > > > > > >>> >> tried it out with 10x, 50x, and even total file size, > though, > > > and > > > > > >>> still am > > > > > >>> >> not seeing a dictionary get created. Is it possible it's > > bounded > > > > by > > > > > >>> file > > > > > >>> >> page size or some other layout option that I need to bump as > > > well? > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> I haven't seen my discussion during my time in the community > > but > > > > > >>> maybe it > > > > > >>> >> > was discussed in the past. I think the main challenge > here > > is > > > > > that > > > > > >>> >> pages > > > > > >>> >> > are either dictionary encoded or not. I'd guess to make > > this > > > > > >>> practical > > > > > >>> >> > there would need to be a new hybrid page type, which I > think > > > it > > > > > >>> might > > > > > >>> >> be an > > > > > >>> >> > interesting idea but quite a bit of work. Additionally, > one > > > > would > > > > > >>> >> likely > > > > > >>> >> > need heuristics for when to potentially use the new mode > > > versus > > > > a > > > > > >>> >> complete > > > > > >>> >> > fallback. > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> Got it, thanks for the explanation! It does seem like a huge > > > > amount > > > > > of > > > > > >>> >> work > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> Best, > > > > > >>> >> Claire > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:16 PM Micah Kornfield < > > > > > >>> emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>> >> wrote: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > - What's the heuristic for Parquet dictionary writing to > > > > succeed > > > > > >>> for a > > > > > >>> >> > > given column? > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/9b5a962df3007009a227ef421600197531f970a5/parquet-column/src/main/java/org/apache/parquet/column/values/dictionary/DictionaryValuesWriter.java#L117 > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > - Is that heuristic configurable at all? > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > I think you are using the right setting, but maybe it is > > > > possible > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> >> > strings are still exceeding the threshold (perhaps > > increasing > > > it > > > > > by > > > > > >>> 50x > > > > > >>> >> or > > > > > >>> >> > more to verify) > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > - For high-cardinality datasets, has the idea of a > > > > > frequency-based > > > > > >>> >> > > dictionary encoding been explored? Say, if the data > > follows > > > a > > > > > >>> certain > > > > > >>> >> > > statistical distribution, we can create a dictionary of > > the > > > > most > > > > > >>> >> frequent > > > > > >>> >> > > values only? > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > I haven't seen my discussion during my time in the > community > > > but > > > > > >>> maybe > > > > > >>> >> it > > > > > >>> >> > was discussed in the past. I think the main challenge > here > > is > > > > > that > > > > > >>> >> pages > > > > > >>> >> > are either dictionary encoded or not. I'd guess to make > > this > > > > > >>> practical > > > > > >>> >> > there would need to be a new hybrid page type, which I > think > > > it > > > > > >>> might > > > > > >>> >> be an > > > > > >>> >> > interesting idea but quite a bit of work. Additionally, > one > > > > would > > > > > >>> >> likely > > > > > >>> >> > need heuristics for when to potentially use the new mode > > > versus > > > > a > > > > > >>> >> complete > > > > > >>> >> > fallback. > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > Cheers, > > > > > >>> >> > Micah > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 12:07 PM Claire McGinty < > > > > > >>> >> > claire.d.mcgi...@gmail.com> > > > > > >>> >> > wrote: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > Hi dev@, > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > I'm running some benchmarking on Parquet read/write > > > > performance > > > > > >>> and > > > > > >>> >> have > > > > > >>> >> > a > > > > > >>> >> > > few questions about how dictionary encoding works under > > the > > > > > hood. > > > > > >>> Let > > > > > >>> >> me > > > > > >>> >> > > know if there's a better channel for this :) > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > My test case uses parquet-avro, where I'm writing a > single > > > > file > > > > > >>> >> > containing > > > > > >>> >> > > 5 million records. Each record has a single column, an > > Avro > > > > > String > > > > > >>> >> field > > > > > >>> >> > > (Parquet binary field). I ran two configurations of base > > > > setup: > > > > > >>> in the > > > > > >>> >> > > first case, the string field has 5,000 possible unique > > > values. > > > > > In > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> >> > > second case, it has 50,000 unique values. > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > In the first case (5k unique values), I used > parquet-tools > > > to > > > > > >>> inspect > > > > > >>> >> the > > > > > >>> >> > > file metadata and found that a dictionary had been > > written: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > % parquet-tools meta testdata-case1.parquet > > > > > >>> >> > > > file schema: testdata.TestRecord > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>> >> > > > stringField: REQUIRED BINARY L:STRING R:0 D:0 > > > > > >>> >> > > > row group 1: RC:5000001 TS:18262874 OFFSET:4 > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>> >> > > > stringField: BINARY UNCOMPRESSED DO:4 FPO:38918 > > > > > >>> >> > SZ:8181452/8181452/1.00 > > > > > >>> >> > > > VC:5000001 ENC:BIT_PACKED,PLAIN_DICTIONARY ST:[min: 0, > > > max: > > > > > 999, > > > > > >>> >> > > num_nulls: > > > > > >>> >> > > > 0] > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > But in the second case (50k unique values), > parquet-tools > > > > shows > > > > > >>> that > > > > > >>> >> no > > > > > >>> >> > > dictionary gets created, and the file size is *much* > > bigger: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > % parquet-tools meta testdata-case2.parquet > > > > > >>> >> > > > file schema: testdata.TestRecord > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>> >> > > > stringField: REQUIRED BINARY L:STRING R:0 D:0 > > > > > >>> >> > > > row group 1: RC:5000001 TS:18262874 OFFSET:4 > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>> >> > > > stringField: BINARY UNCOMPRESSED DO:0 FPO:4 > > > > > >>> >> SZ:43896278/43896278/1.00 > > > > > >>> >> > > > VC:5000001 ENC:PLAIN,BIT_PACKED ST:[min: 0, max: 9999, > > > > > >>> num_nulls: 0] > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > (I created a gist of my test reproduction here > > > > > >>> >> > > < > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > https://gist.github.com/clairemcginty/c3c0be85f51bc23db45a75e8d8a18806 > > > > > >>> >> > >.) > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > Based on this, I'm guessing there's some tip-over point > > > after > > > > > >>> which > > > > > >>> >> > Parquet > > > > > >>> >> > > will give up on writing a dictionary for a given column? > > > After > > > > > >>> reading > > > > > >>> >> > > the Configuration > > > > > >>> >> > > docs > > > > > >>> >> > > < > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr/blob/master/parquet-hadoop/README.md > > > > > >>> >> > > >, > > > > > >>> >> > > I tried increasing the dictionary page size > configuration > > > 5x, > > > > > >>> with the > > > > > >>> >> > same > > > > > >>> >> > > result (no dictionary created). > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > So to summarize, my questions are: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > - What's the heuristic for Parquet dictionary writing to > > > > succeed > > > > > >>> for a > > > > > >>> >> > > given column? > > > > > >>> >> > > - Is that heuristic configurable at all? > > > > > >>> >> > > - For high-cardinality datasets, has the idea of a > > > > > frequency-based > > > > > >>> >> > > dictionary encoding been explored? Say, if the data > > follows > > > a > > > > > >>> certain > > > > > >>> >> > > statistical distribution, we can create a dictionary of > > the > > > > most > > > > > >>> >> frequent > > > > > >>> >> > > values only? > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > Thanks for your time! > > > > > >>> >> > > - Claire > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Aaron Niskode-Dossett, Data Engineering -- Etsy > > > > > > > > > >
