[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4558?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Vladimir Sitnikov updated CALCITE-4558:
---------------------------------------
Summary: Sort CPU cost should be aligned with filter and project: sort
should not incur row copy cost (was: Sort CPU cost should be aligned with
filter and project: sort should incur row copy cost)
> Sort CPU cost should be aligned with filter and project: sort should not
> incur row copy cost
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-4558
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4558
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.26.0
> Reporter: Vladimir Sitnikov
> Priority: Major
>
> Typical Java implementations of the sort do not copy rows (they copy
> references only), so
> it makes little sense to have "row width" as the key driver of the sort
> costing.
> The CPU cost for filter does not include "row copy" cost.
> Even though the implementations might be different, in-core costs should be
> aligned.
> For instance, the current, EnumerableLimitSort and EnumerableSort have
> bytesPerRow multiplier, however, the implementation does not copy rows
> field-by-field .
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
