Repository navigation
Validate TPC-DS results against Vortex and Parquet - #9863
Performance Regression: -13.81%
⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected
Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.
For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.
⚠️ Different runtime environments detected
Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.
❌ 12 regressed benchmarks
✅ 2141 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 518 skipped benchmarks1
Warning
Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | Simulation | decode_primitives[i64, (1000, 32)] |
23.8 µs | 37.2 µs | -36.12% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_exhaustive[null] |
697.6 ns | 805.9 ns | -13.44% |
| ❌ | Simulation | matches_vtable[constant] |
403.3 ns | 457.5 ns | -11.84% |
| ❌ | Simulation | matches_vtable[null] |
403.3 ns | 457.5 ns | -11.84% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_vtable[constant] |
403.7 ns | 457.8 ns | -11.83% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_vtable[null] |
403.7 ns | 457.8 ns | -11.83% |
| ❌ | WallTime | bitpack_blocked_compress_avx2 |
6.7 µs | 7.6 µs | -11.35% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_exhaustive[primitive] |
855.8 ns | 964.1 ns | -11.24% |
| ❌ | Simulation | matches_vtable[primitive] |
457.5 ns | 511.7 ns | -10.59% |
| ❌ | Simulation | matches_vtable[varbinview] |
457.5 ns | 511.7 ns | -10.59% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_vtable[primitive] |
457.8 ns | 512 ns | -10.58% |
| ❌ | Simulation | try_match_vtable[varbinview] |
457.8 ns | 512 ns | -10.58% |
Tip
Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing ji/tpcds-slt-results (73ef78c) with develop (adf3bfa)2
Footnotes
-
518 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
-
No successful run was found on
develop(66a2bf7) during the generation of this report, so adf3bfa was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩