Skip to content

Push get_item through wrapper arrays - #9719

Open
danking wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
dk/get-item-wrapper-pushdown
Open

Push get_item through wrapper arrays#9719
danking wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
dk/get-item-wrapper-pushdown

Conversation

@danking

@danking danking commented Sep 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • push GetItem through Filter wrappers as Filter(GetItem(child), mask)
  • push GetItem through Slice wrappers as Slice(GetItem(child), range)
  • push GetItem through Masked wrappers as Mask(GetItem(child), masked_validity)
  • add regression tests for all three wrapper cases

Tests

  • cargo +nightly fmt --all
  • cargo test -p vortex-array scalar_fn::fns::get_item::tests

Signed-off-by: Daniel King <dan@spiraldb.com>
@danking danking added the changelog/performance A performance improvement label Sep 1, 2026
@danking
danking enabled auto-merge (squash) September 1, 2026 17:34
@codspeed-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Sep 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 10.57%

⚠️ 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.

⚡ 1 improved benchmark
❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 2088 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 206 skipped benchmarks1
🗄️ 4 archived benchmarks run2

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
WallTime arrow_checked_add_u32_neon[16384] 13.5 µs 20.3 µs -33.68%
WallTime arrow_checked_add_u32_avx512[16384] 21.3 µs 17.6 µs +20.59%

Tip

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


Comparing dk/get-item-wrapper-pushdown (ee73b42) with develop (41da992)

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 206 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.

  2. 4 benchmarks were run, but are now archived. If they were deleted in another branch, consider rebasing to remove them from the report. Instead if they were added back, click here to restore them.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

changelog/performance A performance improvement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant