[jira] [Assigned] (SPARK-26205) Optimize In expression for bytes, shorts, ints
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-26205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Apache Spark reassigned SPARK-26205:
Assignee: Apache Spark
> Optimize In expression for bytes, shorts, ints
> --
>
> Key: SPARK-26205
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-26205
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: SQL
>Affects Versions: 3.0.0
>Reporter: Anton Okolnychyi
>Assignee: Apache Spark
>Priority: Major
>
> Currently, {{In}} expressions are compiled into a sequence of if-else
> statements, which results in O\(n\) time complexity. {{InSet}} is an
> optimized version of {{In}}, which is supposed to improve the performance if
> the number of elements is big enough. However, {{InSet}} actually degrades
> the performance in many cases due to various reasons (benchmarks will be
> available in SPARK-26203 and solutions are discussed in SPARK-26204).
> The main idea of this JIRA is to make use of {{tableswitch}} and
> {{lookupswitch}} bytecode instructions. In short, we can improve our time
> complexity from O\(n\) to O\(1\) or at least O\(log n\) by using Java
> {{switch}} statements. We will have O\(1\) time complexity if our case values
> are compact and {{tableswitch}} can be used. Otherwise, {{lookupswitch}} will
> give us O\(log n\).
> An important benefit of the proposed approach is that we do not have to pay
> an extra cost for autoboxing as in case of {{InSet}}. As a consequence, we
> can substantially outperform {{InSet}} even on 250+ elements.
> See
> [here|https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se7/html/jvms-3.html#jvms-3.10]
> and
> [here|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10287700/difference-between-jvms-lookupswitch-and-tableswitch]
> for more information.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
[jira] [Assigned] (SPARK-26205) Optimize In expression for bytes, shorts, ints
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-26205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Apache Spark reassigned SPARK-26205:
Assignee: (was: Apache Spark)
> Optimize In expression for bytes, shorts, ints
> --
>
> Key: SPARK-26205
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-26205
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: SQL
>Affects Versions: 3.0.0
>Reporter: Anton Okolnychyi
>Priority: Major
>
> Currently, {{In}} expressions are compiled into a sequence of if-else
> statements, which results in O\(n\) time complexity. {{InSet}} is an
> optimized version of {{In}}, which is supposed to improve the performance if
> the number of elements is big enough. However, {{InSet}} actually degrades
> the performance in many cases due to various reasons (benchmarks will be
> available in SPARK-26203 and solutions are discussed in SPARK-26204).
> The main idea of this JIRA is to make use of {{tableswitch}} and
> {{lookupswitch}} bytecode instructions. In short, we can improve our time
> complexity from O\(n\) to O\(1\) or at least O\(log n\) by using Java
> {{switch}} statements. We will have O\(1\) time complexity if our case values
> are compact and {{tableswitch}} can be used. Otherwise, {{lookupswitch}} will
> give us O\(log n\).
> An important benefit of the proposed approach is that we do not have to pay
> an extra cost for autoboxing as in case of {{InSet}}. As a consequence, we
> can substantially outperform {{InSet}} even on 250+ elements.
> See
> [here|https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se7/html/jvms-3.html#jvms-3.10]
> and
> [here|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10287700/difference-between-jvms-lookupswitch-and-tableswitch]
> for more information.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
