Re: [DISCUSS] Apache AGE 0.6.0 Release

2021-09-10 Thread Muhammad Shoaib 
Looks gokd to me

+1

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021, 08:28 John Gemignani 
wrote:

> Looks good to me.
>
> +1
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 9:52 AM Josh Innis  wrote:
>
> > Dear Apache Community,
> >
> >
> >
> > We would like to discuss the Apache AGE release 0.6.0. that we have been
> > working toward it.
> >
> >
> >
> > To learn more about Apache AGE, please see http://age.apache.org/
> >
> >
> >
> > Functionalities included and addressed in this release:
> >
> >
> >- Add VLE SRF (Set Returning Function).
> >- Fix Vertex, Edge, and Path serialization bug (AGE2-307)
> >- Fix CREATE passback bug (AGE2-337).
> >- Fix CREATE transaction block bug (AGE2-345).
> >- Fix parallel build errors.
> >- Fix Travis CI compiler warnings.
> >
> >
> > *
> >
> > The git tag to be discussed and voted upon:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0
> >
> >
> >
> > The git commit hash:
> >
> > commit 3681c90da68353507001db89eb429755d34857f7
> >
> >
> >
> > The release files for 0.6.0, can be found at:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0.rc0/
> >
> >
> >
> > The signatures, files, etc. can be found at:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/
> >
> >
> >
> > Signatures used for AGE RCs can be found in this file:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/KEYS
> >
> >
> >
> > The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts:
> >
> > 2245 1CFA 0521 1612 A4EA  9F05 6EF7 BD28 B870 8B05
> >
> >
> >
> > For information about the contents of this release, see:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please share your thoughts and feedback and let us know if we can call
> for
> > a vote.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your time.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Josh Innis
> >
> > We create value for our clients by connecting the world's data.
> > Josh Innis Software Engineer
> > Core R&D Team
> > *P*: (831)278-0327
> > 3945 Freedom Circle #260, Santa Clara, CA 95054
> > <
> >
> https://www.google.com/maps/place/3945+Freedom+Cir+%23260,+Santa+Clara,+CA+95054/
> > >
> > bitnine.net
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache AGE 0.6.0 Release

2021-09-10 Thread John Gemignani 
Looks good to me.

+1

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 9:52 AM Josh Innis  wrote:

> Dear Apache Community,
>
>
>
> We would like to discuss the Apache AGE release 0.6.0. that we have been
> working toward it.
>
>
>
> To learn more about Apache AGE, please see http://age.apache.org/
>
>
>
> Functionalities included and addressed in this release:
>
>
>- Add VLE SRF (Set Returning Function).
>- Fix Vertex, Edge, and Path serialization bug (AGE2-307)
>- Fix CREATE passback bug (AGE2-337).
>- Fix CREATE transaction block bug (AGE2-345).
>- Fix parallel build errors.
>- Fix Travis CI compiler warnings.
>
>
> *
>
> The git tag to be discussed and voted upon:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0
>
>
>
> The git commit hash:
>
> commit 3681c90da68353507001db89eb429755d34857f7
>
>
>
> The release files for 0.6.0, can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0.rc0/
>
>
>
> The signatures, files, etc. can be found at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/
>
>
>
> Signatures used for AGE RCs can be found in this file:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/KEYS
>
>
>
> The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts:
>
> 2245 1CFA 0521 1612 A4EA  9F05 6EF7 BD28 B870 8B05
>
>
>
> For information about the contents of this release, see:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0
>
>
>
>
>
> Please share your thoughts and feedback and let us know if we can call for
> a vote.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Josh Innis
>
> We create value for our clients by connecting the world's data.
> Josh Innis Software Engineer
> Core R&D Team
> *P*: (831)278-0327
> 3945 Freedom Circle #260, Santa Clara, CA 95054
> <
> https://www.google.com/maps/place/3945+Freedom+Cir+%23260,+Santa+Clara,+CA+95054/
> >
> bitnine.net
>

Re: Benchmarking result

2021-09-10 Thread Joe Fagan 
Great Josh.
I learnt loads reading your script

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 at 18:14, Josh Innis  wrote:

> Good Job Viet. I made some modifications to the SQL function that you
> made. This may be a way to analyze how long it takes to run the queries in
> a purely postgres way that only calls explain analyze once.
>
> SET search_path TO ag_catalog;
> LOAD 'age';
> SELECT create_graph('test_graph');
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION f_test(ct int, sql text)
> RETURNS VOID
> LANGUAGE plpgsql AS $func$
>DECLARE   i int;
> BEGIN
> FOR i IN 1 .. $1 LOOP
> EXECUTE sql;
> END LOOP;
> END $func$;
>
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT *
> FROM f_test( 1, $q$
> SELECT * from ag_catalog.cypher('test_graph', $$
> CREATE (a:Person {id: 129, name: 'Brian', title: 'Researcher',
> city: 'Munich'})
> RETURN a
> $$) as (a agtype)
> $q$);
>
> We create value for our clients by connecting the world's data.
> Josh Innis Software Engineer
> Core R&D Team
> *P*: (831)278-0327
> 3945 Freedom Circle #260, Santa Clara, CA 95054
> 
> bitnine.net
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 9:12 AM John Gemignani 
> wrote:
>
>> Good job!
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:11 PM VUONG QUOC Viet 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Joe and Muhammad,
>>>
>>> I've finished the benchmarking experiments after listening to Muhammad's
>>> suggestions to improve the process: 1. to create 2 separate repos for
>>> original code and optimized code and 2. place the create_graph at the
>>> beginning and drop_graph at the end of each sql file.
>>>
>>> The experiments were conducted basically the same way: I calculated the
>>> total time for running 100, 1000 and 1 sql queries, repeated 20 times
>>> consecutively, got the average value, and repeated that process 10 times
>>> more. So in essence, there are totally 200 measurements conducted for
>>> original and optimized code, each. And I calculated overall average for
>>> total 200 measurements to get a final number to compare between the
>>> original and the optimized: So here's the result:
>>>
>>> Original code (ms) Optimized code (ms) Difference(ms)
>>> 100 queries 29.23397 28.786665 0.447305
>>> 1000 queries 255.391305 250.43654 4.9547650004
>>> 1 queries 2558.612315 2517.9374 40.674915001
>>>
>>> According to the result, the difference in execution time for 100
>>> queries is that the optimized code was about 0.45ms faster than the
>>> original code. For 1000 queries, the optimized code is 4.95ms faster and
>>> for 1 queries, it's 40.67ms faster. These numbers, I think, are
>>> reasonable, because as we make the number of queries 10 times larger, the
>>> difference in time also increases around 10 times.
>>>
>>> I've attached the detailed statistics report. Please let me know your
>>> comments and suggestions.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Viet.
>>>
>>> --



Joe Fagan

Community Advocate Director



 M : +44 7788 148772




 

A Graph Extension for PostgreSQL In the news: Bitnine
Promoting a First IPO in the Graph Database

Re: Benchmarking result

2021-09-10 Thread Josh Innis 
Good Job Viet. I made some modifications to the SQL function that you made.
This may be a way to analyze how long it takes to run the queries in a
purely postgres way that only calls explain analyze once.

SET search_path TO ag_catalog;
LOAD 'age';
SELECT create_graph('test_graph');

CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION f_test(ct int, sql text)
RETURNS VOID
LANGUAGE plpgsql AS $func$
   DECLARE   i int;
BEGIN
FOR i IN 1 .. $1 LOOP
EXECUTE sql;
END LOOP;
END $func$;

EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT *
FROM f_test( 1, $q$
SELECT * from ag_catalog.cypher('test_graph', $$
CREATE (a:Person {id: 129, name: 'Brian', title: 'Researcher',
city: 'Munich'})
RETURN a
$$) as (a agtype)
$q$);

We create value for our clients by connecting the world's data.
Josh Innis Software Engineer
Core R&D Team
*P*: (831)278-0327
3945 Freedom Circle #260, Santa Clara, CA 95054

bitnine.net


On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 9:12 AM John Gemignani 
wrote:

> Good job!
>
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:11 PM VUONG QUOC Viet  wrote:
>
>> Hi Joe and Muhammad,
>>
>> I've finished the benchmarking experiments after listening to Muhammad's
>> suggestions to improve the process: 1. to create 2 separate repos for
>> original code and optimized code and 2. place the create_graph at the
>> beginning and drop_graph at the end of each sql file.
>>
>> The experiments were conducted basically the same way: I calculated the
>> total time for running 100, 1000 and 1 sql queries, repeated 20 times
>> consecutively, got the average value, and repeated that process 10 times
>> more. So in essence, there are totally 200 measurements conducted for
>> original and optimized code, each. And I calculated overall average for
>> total 200 measurements to get a final number to compare between the
>> original and the optimized: So here's the result:
>>
>> Original code (ms) Optimized code (ms) Difference(ms)
>> 100 queries 29.23397 28.786665 0.447305
>> 1000 queries 255.391305 250.43654 4.9547650004
>> 1 queries 2558.612315 2517.9374 40.674915001
>>
>> According to the result, the difference in execution time for 100 queries
>> is that the optimized code was about 0.45ms faster than the original code.
>> For 1000 queries, the optimized code is 4.95ms faster and for 1
>> queries, it's 40.67ms faster. These numbers, I think, are reasonable,
>> because as we make the number of queries 10 times larger, the difference in
>> time also increases around 10 times.
>>
>> I've attached the detailed statistics report. Please let me know your
>> comments and suggestions.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Viet.
>>
>>

[DISCUSS] Apache AGE 0.6.0 Release

2021-09-10 Thread Josh Innis 
Dear Apache Community,



We would like to discuss the Apache AGE release 0.6.0. that we have been
working toward it.



To learn more about Apache AGE, please see http://age.apache.org/



Functionalities included and addressed in this release:


   - Add VLE SRF (Set Returning Function).
   - Fix Vertex, Edge, and Path serialization bug (AGE2-307)
   - Fix CREATE passback bug (AGE2-337).
   - Fix CREATE transaction block bug (AGE2-345).
   - Fix parallel build errors.
   - Fix Travis CI compiler warnings.


*

The git tag to be discussed and voted upon:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0



The git commit hash:

commit 3681c90da68353507001db89eb429755d34857f7



The release files for 0.6.0, can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0.rc0/



The signatures, files, etc. can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/



Signatures used for AGE RCs can be found in this file:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/KEYS



The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts:

2245 1CFA 0521 1612 A4EA  9F05 6EF7 BD28 B870 8B05



For information about the contents of this release, see:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/releases/tag/v0.6.0





Please share your thoughts and feedback and let us know if we can call for
a vote.



Thank you for your time.



Best regards,

Josh Innis

We create value for our clients by connecting the world's data.
Josh Innis Software Engineer
Core R&D Team
*P*: (831)278-0327
3945 Freedom Circle #260, Santa Clara, CA 95054

bitnine.net

Re: Benchmarking result

2021-09-10 Thread John Gemignani 
Good job!

On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:11 PM VUONG QUOC Viet  wrote:

> Hi Joe and Muhammad,
>
> I've finished the benchmarking experiments after listening to Muhammad's
> suggestions to improve the process: 1. to create 2 separate repos for
> original code and optimized code and 2. place the create_graph at the
> beginning and drop_graph at the end of each sql file.
>
> The experiments were conducted basically the same way: I calculated the
> total time for running 100, 1000 and 1 sql queries, repeated 20 times
> consecutively, got the average value, and repeated that process 10 times
> more. So in essence, there are totally 200 measurements conducted for
> original and optimized code, each. And I calculated overall average for
> total 200 measurements to get a final number to compare between the
> original and the optimized: So here's the result:
>
> Original code (ms) Optimized code (ms) Difference(ms)
> 100 queries 29.23397 28.786665 0.447305
> 1000 queries 255.391305 250.43654 4.9547650004
> 1 queries 2558.612315 2517.9374 40.674915001
>
> According to the result, the difference in execution time for 100 queries
> is that the optimized code was about 0.45ms faster than the original code.
> For 1000 queries, the optimized code is 4.95ms faster and for 1
> queries, it's 40.67ms faster. These numbers, I think, are reasonable,
> because as we make the number of queries 10 times larger, the difference in
> time also increases around 10 times.
>
> I've attached the detailed statistics report. Please let me know your
> comments and suggestions.
>
> Best regards,
> Viet.
>
>