MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306316908 · doi:10.1145/3511808.3557117

BLUTune: Query-informed Multi-stage IBM Db2 Tuning via ML

2022· article· en· W4306316908 on OpenAlexaff
Connor Henderson, Spencer Bryson, Vincent Corvinelli, Parke Godfrey, Piotr Mierzejewski, Jaroslaw Szlichta, Calisto Zuzarte

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)Ontario Tech UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIBMReinforcement learningEmbeddingProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceResource (disambiguation)Machine learningOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern data systems such as IBM Db2 have hundreds of system configuration parameters, ''knobs", which heavily influence the performance of business queries. Manual configuration, ''tuning," by experts is painstaking and time consuming. We propose a query informed tuning system called BLUTune which uses machine learning (ML)-deep reinforcement learning based on advantage actor critic neural networks-to tune configurations within defined resource constraints. We translate high-dimensional query execution plans (QEPs) into a low-dimensional embedding space (QEP2Vec) for input into the ML models. To scale to complex and large workloads, we bootstrap the training process through transfer learning. We first train our model based on the estimated cost of queries; we then fine-tune it based on actual query execution times. We demonstrate by an experimental study over various synthetic and real-world workloads BLUTune's efficiency and effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge ManagementSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207