Github user davies commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11454#discussion_r54660062
  
    --- Diff: 
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/parquet/ParquetReadBenchmark.scala
 ---
    @@ -219,11 +216,43 @@ object ParquetReadBenchmark {
             /*
             Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4870HQ CPU @ 2.50GHz
             Int and String Scan:                Best/Avg Time(ms)    Rate(M/s) 
  Per Row(ns)   Relative
    -        
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -        SQL Parquet Reader                       1381 / 1679          7.6  
       131.7       1.0X
    -        SQL Parquet MR                           2005 / 2177          5.2  
       191.2       0.7X
    -        SQL Parquet Vectorized                    919 / 1044         11.4  
        87.6       1.5X
    -        ParquetReader                            1035 / 1163         10.1  
        98.7       1.3X
    +        
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    +        SQL Parquet Vectorized                   1025 / 1180         10.2  
        97.8       1.0X
    +        SQL Parquet MR                           2157 / 2222          4.9  
       205.7       0.5X
    +        SQL Parquet Non-vectorized               1450 / 1466          7.2  
       138.3       0.7X
    +        ParquetReader                            1005 / 1022         10.4  
        95.9       1.0X
    --- End diff --
    
    Do you know why the first on is as fast as this one (only 20ms slower)? 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to