Relocate Delta's selection policy into cost-model priors; plumb the model through the builders by connortsui20 · Pull Request #8700 · vortex-data/vortex

Performance Regression: -6.18%

⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
❌ 3 regressed benchmarks
✅ 1616 untouched benchmarks
🆕 39 new benchmarks
⏩ 47 skipped benchmarks¹

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

	Mode	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
❌	Simulation	`chunked_varbinview_into_canonical[(100, 100)]`	271.6 µs	327.8 µs	-17.13%
❌	Simulation	`chunked_varbinview_opt_canonical_into[(100, 100)]`	305.3 µs	367.6 µs	-16.96%
❌	Simulation	`encode_primitives[i64, (1000, 512)]`	117.5 µs	137.6 µs	-14.6%
⚡	Simulation	`chunked_bool_canonical_into[(1000, 10)]`	16.4 µs	14.6 µs	+12.36%
⚡	Simulation	`true_count_vortex_buffer[128]`	638.3 ns	580 ns	+10.06%
🆕	Simulation	`ilike_contains`	N/A	782.5 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_contains`	N/A	154.5 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_exact`	N/A	43.9 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_per_row_patterns`	N/A	168.7 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_prefix`	N/A	50.9 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_regex`	N/A	623 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`like_suffix`	N/A	64.9 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`cached_indices_i128[0.01]`	N/A	29 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`cached_indices_i128[0.1]`	N/A	82.1 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`cached_indices_i32[0.01]`	N/A	22.5 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`cached_indices_i32[0.1]`	N/A	55.9 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`patterns_i128[Contiguous]`	N/A	234.8 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`patterns_i128[Random]`	N/A	290.4 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`patterns_i128[Runs]`	N/A	244.8 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`random_i128[0.01]`	N/A	29.2 µs	N/A
...	...	...	...	...	...

ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.

Tip

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

_{Comparing cost-model-r5-builders (a89ad4c) with cost-model-r3-lower-bound (d7a3b3a)²}

47 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. ↩
No successful run was found on cost-model-r3-lower-bound (02309ed) during the generation of this report, so afb6425 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩