Towards a Hybrid Design for Fast Query Processing in DB2 with BLU Acceleration Using Graphical Processing Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we show how we use Nvidia GPUs and host CPU cores for faster query processing in a DB2 database using BLU Acceleration (DB2's column store technology). Moreover, we show the benefits and problems of using hardware accelerators (more specifically GPUs) in a real commercial Relational Database Management System(RDBMS).We investigate the effect of off-loading specific database operations to a GPU, and show how doing so results in a significant performance improvement. We then demonstrate that for some queries, using just CPU to perform the entire operation is more beneficial. While we use some of Nvidia's fast kernels for operations like sort, we have also developed our own high performance kernels for operations such as group by and aggregation. Finally, we show how we use a dynamic design that can make use of optimizer metadata to intelligently choose a GPU kernel to run. For the first time in the literature, we use benchmarks representative of customer environments to gauge the performance of our prototype, the results of which show that we can get a speed increase upwards of 2x, using a realistic set of queries.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".