asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From mingda li <limingda1...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Time of Multiple Joins in AsterixDB
Date Wed, 21 Dec 2016 01:44:01 GMT
Oh, sure. When we test the 100G multiple join, we find AsterixDB is slower
than Spark (but still faster than Pig and Hive).
I can share with you the both plots: 1-10G.eps and 1-100G.eps. (We will
only use 1-10G.eps in our paper).
And thanks for Ian's advice:* The dev list generally strips attachments.
Maybe you can just put the config inline? Or link to a pastebin/gist?*
I know why you can't see the attachments. So I move the plots with two
documents to my Dropbox.
You can find the
1-10G.eps here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rk3xg6gigsfcuyq/1-10G.eps?dl=0
1-100G.eps here:https://www.dropbox.com/s/tyxnmt6ehau2ski/1-100G.eps?dl=0
cc_conf.pdf here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/y3of1s17qdstv5f/cc_conf.pdf?dl=0
CompleteQuery.pdf here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lml3fzxfjcmf2c1/CompleteQuery.pdf?dl=0

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Tyson Condie <tcondie.ucla@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Mingda: Please also share the numbers for 100GB, which show AsterixDB not
> quite doing as well as Spark. These 100GB results will not be in our
> submission version, since they’re not needed for the desired message:
> picking the right join order matters. Nevertheless, I’d like to get a
> better understanding of what’s going on in the larger dataset regime.
>
>
>
> -Tyson
>
>
>
> From: Yingyi Bu [mailto:buyingyi@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 4:30 PM
> To: dev@asterixdb.apache.org
> Cc: Michael Carey <mjcarey@ics.uci.edu>; Tyson Condie <
> tcondie.ucla@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Time of Multiple Joins in AsterixDB
>
>
>
> Hi Mingda,
>
>
>
>      It looks that you didn't attach the pdf?
>
>      Thanks!
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Yingyi
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:15 PM, mingda li <limingda1993@gmail.com
> <mailto:limingda1993@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> Sorry for the wrong version of cc.conf. I convert it to pdf version as
> attachment.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, mingda li <limingda1993@gmail.com
> <mailto:limingda1993@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I am testing different systems' (AsterixDB, Spark, Hive, Pig) multiple
> joins to see if there is a big difference with different join order. This
> is the reason for our research on multiple join and the result will apppear
> in our paper which is to be submitted to VLDB soon. Could you help us to
> make sure that the test results make sense for AsterixDB?
>
>
>
> We configure the AsterixDB 0.8.9 ( use asterix-server-0.8.9-SNAPSHOT-binary-assembly)
> in our cluster of 16 machines, each with a 3.40GHz i7 processor (4 cores
> and 2 hyper-threads per core), 32GB of RAM and 1TB of disk capacity. The
> operating system is 64-bit Ubuntu 12.04. JDK version 1.8.0. During
> configuration, I follow the NCService instruction here
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/asterixdb/ncservice.html. And I set the
> cc.conf as in attachment. (Each node work as nc and the first node also
> work as cc).
>
>
>
> For experiment, we use 3 fact tables from TPC-DS: inventory;
> catalog_sales; catalog_returns with TPC-DS scale factor 1g and 10g. The
> multiple join query we use in AsterixDB are as following:
>
>
>
> Good Join Order: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (SELECT * FROM catalog_sales cs1
> JOIN catalog_returns cr1
>
>  ON (cs1.cs_order_number = cr1.cr_order_number AND cs1.cs_item_sk =
> cr1.cr_item_sk))  m1 JOIN inventory i1 ON i1.inv_item_sk = cs1.cs_item_sk;
>
>
>
> Bad Join Order: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (SELECT * FROM catalog_sales cs1 JOIN
> inventory i1 ON cs1.cs_item_sk = i1.inv_item_sk) m1 JOIN catalog_returns
> cr1 ON (cs1.cs_order_number = cr1.cr_order_number AND cs1.cs_item_sk =
> cr1.cr_item_sk);
>
>
>
> We load the data to AsterixDB firstly and run the two different queries.
> (The complete version of all queries for AsterixDB is in attachment)  We
> assume the data has already been stored in AsterixDB and only count the
> time for multiple join.
>
>
>
> Meanwhile, we use the same dataset and query to test Spark, Pig and Hive.
> The result is shown in the attachment's figure. And you can find
> AsterixDB's time is always better than others  no matter good or bad
> order:-) (BTW, the y scale of figure is time in log scale. You can see the
> time by the label of each bar.)
>
>
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
>
>
> Bests,
>
> Mingda
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message