On Thu Jul 23, 2026 at 9:02 AM -03, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 7/21/26 18:24, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> ... >> >> FWIW I'm running some tests on TPC-H, to see which queries would benefit >> from this, how much, if there are issues, etc. Should have some numbers >> later this week. >> > Here's some results for TPC-H scale 10 and 50 (so relatively small, but > manageable on my test systems). I used the same schema/indexes as usual. > There may be a better schema, but what matters is the impact of enabling > Bloom filters. > > The PDF shows results for the 22 TPC-H queries, for combinations of a > couple parameters: > > - scale: 10GB vs. 50GB > - cold vs. warmed-up > - buffered I/O vs. direct I/O > - 0 vs. 4 parallel workers > > The last four columns compare the runs with filters enabled vs. > disabled. Green = good/faster. > > Overall, the results are pretty good. There's 5-6 queries with ~25% > speedup, Q9 gets ~5x faster (10x with direct I/O). There's a bit of > difference depending on the scale, direct I/O, etc. > > Of course, this mostly ignores the planning overhead. It's analytics > benchmark, with multi-second queries, and the queries are relatively > simple, so there's not that many possible filters. > > But overall it seems like a good result for a WIP patch. There are no > visible regressions - it's all within noise, considering there was a > single run per query / parameters. >
Yeah, it looks good numbers at this stage, thanks for sharing. FWIW I'm working on implementing the paper heuristics on top of now v7. Once I have something I'll share and I'll also run some benchmarks similar to what you've shared here so we can compare the results. -- Matheus Alcantara EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
