HippoBaro opened a new pull request, #11268: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/11268
# Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. --> - Contributes to #9731 . # Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> We do not track memory usage for the Parquet writer. Native REE support should improve memory usage materially so we need some bench harnesses to keep track of that over time. Add a dedicated memory benchmark with two complementary measurements: incremental peak live memory and cumulative allocated bytes over a complete writer lifecycle. # What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> - Add the `arrow_writer_peak_memory` Criterion benchmark with peak-live-memory and cumulative-allocation measurements. - Measure writer construction, `write()`, and `close()`, including writer destruction. - Exclude input construction and configuration cloning from the measured window. - Exercise primitive, sparse, dictionary, run-end-encoded, and nested inputs under the default, Parquet 2.0, and content-defined-chunking configurations. - Write to a discarding sink so output retention outside the writer does not dominate the measurements. - Keep allocation tracking local to the benchmark through a thread-local allocator wrapper. The measurements target the synchronous, single-threaded writer; they are not whole-process resident-memory measurements. # Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? If this PR claims a performance improvement, please include evidence such as benchmark results. --> NA # Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please call them out. --> NA -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
