MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007378362 · doi:10.1145/3377555.3377892

Improving database query performance with automatic fusion

2020· article· en· W3007378362 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerLoop fusionQuery optimizationSQLSargableDatabaseFuse (electrical)Query languageProgramming languageViewLoop unrollingSearch engineWeb search queryInformation retrievalDatabase design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Array-based programming languages have shown significant promise for improving performance of column-based in-memory database systems, allowing elegant representation of query execution plans that are also amenable to standard compiler optimization techniques. Use of loop fusion, however, is not straightforward, due to the complexity of built-in functions for implementing complex database operators. In this work, we apply a compiler approach to optimize SQL query execution plans that are expressed in an array-based intermediate representation. We analyze this code to determine shape properties of the data being processed, and use a subsequent optimization phase to fuse multiple database operators into single, compound operations, reducing the need for separate computation and storage of intermediate values. Experimental results on a range of TPC-H queries show that our fusion technique is effective in generating efficient code, improving query time over a baseline system.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207