[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4160?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Ethan Wang updated PHOENIX-4160:
--------------------------------
    Environment: 



  was:

{code:java}
// Some comments here
public String getFoo()
{
    return foo;
}
{code}


    Description: 
Now after -PHOENIX-418- finishes, currently the hash size is hard coded as 
25/16 bits by default (a design we follow Apache Druid. discussion see 
CALCITE-1588). And now we want to study to find a proper default size.

Note:
1, the std error of hyperloglog is bound by 1/sqrt(size of hash). i.e.,  
{code:java}sqrt(3\*ln(2)-1)/sqrt(2^precision){code} Detail see the page 129 of 
this [paper|http://algo.inria.fr/flajolet/Publications/FlFuGaMe07.pdf].
To try on a bigger size, the performance of hll under different bucket/hash 
size has been studied here: 
https://metron.apache.org/current-book/metron-analytics/metron-statistics/HLLP.html

2, When the estimate cardinalities is large enough, this performance of hll 
will become problematic because the hash collisions (saturation). For detail 
see the study done by Flajolet et al. In fact, Timok proposed that any number 
larger than {code}2^{32}/30{code} should consider "to large" for a 32 bit hash. 
See study [Google’s Take On Engineering 
HLL|https://research.neustar.biz/2013/01/24/hyperloglog-googles-take-on-engineering-hll/]
 and the Figure 8 of 
[paper|https://stefanheule.com/papers/edbt13-hyperloglog.pdf]

Alternatively we can instruct user to not only use it in exceedingly huge 
cardinally scenario.

  was:
Now after -PHOENIX-418- finishes, currently the hash size is hard coded as 
25/16 bits by default (a design we follow Apache Druid. discussion see 
CALCITE-1588). And now we want to study to find a proper default size.

Note:
1, the std error of hyperloglog is bound by 1/sqrt(size of hash). i.e.,  
{code:java}sqrt(3\*ln(2)-1)/sqrt(2^precision){code} Detail see the page 129 of 
this [paper|http://algo.inria.fr/flajolet/Publications/FlFuGaMe07.pdf].
To try on a bigger size, the performance of hll under different bucket/hash 
size has been studied here: 
https://metron.apache.org/current-book/metron-analytics/metron-statistics/HLLP.html

2, When the estimate cardinalities is large enough, this performance of hll 
will become problematic because the hash collisions (saturation). For detail 
see the study done by Flajolet et al. In fact, Timok proposed that any number 
larger than {code:java}2^{32}/30{code} should consider "to large" for a 32 bit 
hash. See study [Google’s Take On Engineering 
HLL|https://research.neustar.biz/2013/01/24/hyperloglog-googles-take-on-engineering-hll/]
 and the Figure 8 of 
[paper|https://stefanheule.com/papers/edbt13-hyperloglog.pdf]

Alternatively we can instruct user to not only use it in exceedingly huge 
cardinally scenario.


> research for a proper hash size set for APPROX_COUNT_DISTINCT
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-4160
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4160
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>         Environment: 
>            Reporter: Ethan Wang
>
> Now after -PHOENIX-418- finishes, currently the hash size is hard coded as 
> 25/16 bits by default (a design we follow Apache Druid. discussion see 
> CALCITE-1588). And now we want to study to find a proper default size.
> Note:
> 1, the std error of hyperloglog is bound by 1/sqrt(size of hash). i.e.,  
> {code:java}sqrt(3\*ln(2)-1)/sqrt(2^precision){code} Detail see the page 129 
> of this [paper|http://algo.inria.fr/flajolet/Publications/FlFuGaMe07.pdf].
> To try on a bigger size, the performance of hll under different bucket/hash 
> size has been studied here: 
> https://metron.apache.org/current-book/metron-analytics/metron-statistics/HLLP.html
> 2, When the estimate cardinalities is large enough, this performance of hll 
> will become problematic because the hash collisions (saturation). For detail 
> see the study done by Flajolet et al. In fact, Timok proposed that any number 
> larger than {code}2^{32}/30{code} should consider "to large" for a 32 bit 
> hash. See study [Google’s Take On Engineering 
> HLL|https://research.neustar.biz/2013/01/24/hyperloglog-googles-take-on-engineering-hll/]
>  and the Figure 8 of 
> [paper|https://stefanheule.com/papers/edbt13-hyperloglog.pdf]
> Alternatively we can instruct user to not only use it in exceedingly huge 
> cardinally scenario.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to