Skip to content

Speed up V2 scans and default datafusion-bench to V2 for TPC-DS and ClickBench - #10799

Draft
joseph-isaacs wants to merge 4 commits into
developfrom
ji/scan-v2-clickbench-tpcds
Draft

joseph-isaacs wants to merge 4 commits into
developfrom
ji/scan-v2-clickbench-tpcds

Join short edge chunks of a V2 scan to their neighbours

65bf7e9
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
CodSpeed / CodSpeed Performance Analysis failed Oct 27, 2026 in 0s

Performance Regression: -16.7%

3 warnings, 1 note

⚠️ Walltime results may be unreliable

Some benchmarks used the Walltime instrument outside CodSpeed Macro Runners, which can make the results inconsistent.

Learn more about Macro Runners

See affected benchmarks

⚠️ Unable to measure the execution of 2 benchmarks

These benchmarks measured no execution time, so their results are not comparable and count as unchanged. This usually happens when the compiler removes the code under test.

Prevent compiler optimizations

See affected benchmarks

⚠️ 21 benchmarks are dominated by system calls

System calls cannot be simulated consistently and are left out of the measure. The reported value understates the real cost. Switch to the Walltime instrument to measure them.

Learn more about system calls

See affected benchmarks

ℹ️ 40 benchmarks have no flamegraph

The flamegraph wasn't generated: the symbols of the profiling trace could not be resolved, because no information about the language frames was collected.

See affected benchmarks

❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 2438 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 116 skipped benchmarks1

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
❌ CPU Simulation missing_stats[16] 70.8 µs 85 µs -16.7%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.


Comparing ji/scan-v2-clickbench-tpcds (65bf7e9) with develop (cd45524)

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 116 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. ↩