Skip to content

Note that the benchmark table is a sample, not a fixed result #7

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
sahilkalgutkar merged 1 commit into from
Aug 28, 2026
Merged

Note that the benchmark table is a sample, not a fixed result #7

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -185,8 +185,13 @@ join 4999 1.22ms 123.6x 151.20ms 2 read

The three-figure numbers are zone-map pruning: reading 3 row groups instead of
62. The 4.5x on a full aggregate is projection pushdown on its own — one column
chunk per row group instead of four. Reproduce with `cargo run --release --
bench`.
chunk per row group instead of four.

That table is one recorded run, not a fixed result: `cargo run --release --
bench` regenerates it, and the ratios move by tens of percent between runs and
between machines. The row-group counts do not, which is why they are the number
worth reading — they are a property of the data and the predicate rather than of
the hardware.

`EXPLAIN ANALYZE` reports the same counters per operator:

Expand Down
Loading