Towards a Combined Grouping and Aggregation Algorithm for Fast Query Processing in Columnar Databases with GPUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Column-store in-memory databases have received a lot of attention because of their fast query processing response times on modern multi-core machines. Among different database operations, group by/aggregate is an important and potentially costly operation. Moreover, sort-based and hash-based algorithms are the most common ways of processing group by/aggregate queries. While sort-based algorithms are used in traditional Data Base Management Systems (DBMS), hash based algorithms can be applied for faster query processing in new columnar databases. Besides, Graphical Processing Units (GPU) can be utilized as fast, high bandwidth co-processors to improve the query processing performance of columnar databases. The focus of this article is on the prototype for group by/aggregate operations that we created to exploit GPUs. We show different hash based algorithms to improve the performance of group by/aggregate operations on GPU. One of the parameters that affect the performance of the group by/aggregate algorithm is the number of groups and hashing algorithm. We show that we can get up to 7.6x improvement in kernel performance compared to a multi-core CPU implementation when we use a partitioned multi-level hash algorithm using GPU shared and global memories.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".