lobsters: fixture DB ships without planner statistics; one misplanned query dominates several routes
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
- Lenguaje dominante
- Ruby
- Estrellas
- 119
- Forks
- 36
- Merge medio
- 14 h 21 min
- PR fusionados (30 d)
- 6
Descripción
The lobsters fixture DB (benchmarks/lobsters/db/production.sqlite3) carries no sqlite_stat1 table — ANALYZE has never been run on it — and benchmark.rb's in-memory copy inherits that. Without planner statistics, SQLite misplans the hottest-stories query (the scope under /, /rss, and /recent, which the route mix visits every iteration): it walks index_stories_on_merged_story_id across all ~11k stories, evaluates the correlated hidden_stories subquery per row, then temp-B-tree sorts, instead of reading hotness_idx in order and stopping at the LIMIT.
Repro, runnable from benchmarks/lobsters/ with only the sqlite3 gem (the query text is exactly what ActiveRecord generates for a logged-in user; .to_sql on the StoryRepository#hottest relation produces it verbatim):
# repro.rb — run from benchmarks/lobsters/
require "sqlite3"
Q = <<~SQL
SELECT "stories".* FROM "stories" WHERE "stories"."merged_story_id" IS NULL
AND "stories"."is_deleted" = FALSE AND (score >= 0)
AND NOT (EXISTS (SELECT TRUE FROM "hidden_stories"
WHERE (hidden_stories.story_id = stories.id) AND "hidden_stories"."user_id" = 12))
ORDER BY hotness LIMIT 26 OFFSET 0
SQL
mem = SQLite3::Database.new(":memory:")
file = SQLite3::Database.new("db/production.sqlite3", readonly: true)
bk = SQLite3::Backup.new(mem, "main", file, "main")
bk.step(-1)
bk.finish
file.close
def bench(db, label)
db.execute(Q) # warm
t0 = Process.clock_gettime(Process::CLOCK_MONOTONIC)
50.times { db.execute(Q) }
ms = (Process.clock_gettime(Process::CLOCK_MONOTONIC) - t0) / 50 * 1000
plan = db.execute("EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN #{Q}").map { |r| r[3] }.join(" | ")
puts format("%-12s %7.3f ms %s", label, ms, plan)
end
bench(mem, "no stats:")
mem.execute("ANALYZE")
bench(mem, "with stats:")
Output on an M-series Mac (CRuby 4.0.5, sqlite3 2.9.5):
no stats: 4.936 ms SEARCH stories USING INDEX index_stories_on_merged_story_id (merged_story_id=?) | CORRELATED SCALAR SUBQUERY 1 | SEARCH hidden_stories USING COVERING INDEX index_hidden_stories_on_user_id_and_story_id (user_id=? AND story_id=?) | USE TEMP B-TREE FOR ORDER BY
with stats: 0.090 ms SCAN stories USING INDEX hotness_idx | CORRELATED SCALAR SUBQUERY 1 | SEARCH hidden_stories USING COVERING INDEX index_hidden_stories_on_user_id_and_story_id (user_id=? AND story_id=?)
~55× on this query, and it runs many times per benchmark iteration. In a per-route breakdown of the frozen visit sequence, this one query is ~73% of /rss's wall time and similarly dominates / (hottest) and /recent — measured identically on stock Rails and on a transpiled variant of the app, so it's a property of the fixture, not the framework.
Why it may matter for ruby-bench's purpose: this is constant C-side SQLite time, identical across every Ruby/JIT configuration, so it dilutes exactly the Ruby-side differences the benchmark exists to measure. A production database would have statistics (MySQL/MariaDB in real lobsters keeps them automatically; Rails' SQLite3 adapter in a long-running deployment accumulates them via PRAGMA optimize), so the no-stats plan is an artifact of seeding from a bare fixture rather than something a real deployment would exhibit.
Two possible remedies, either of which resolves it:
- Run
ANALYZEonce inbenchmark.rbright after theSQLite3::Backuprestore (outside the timed region; ~100 ms one-time). - Ship the fixture DB with statistics baked in (
sqlite3 db/production.sqlite3 ANALYZEonce —sqlite_stat1is an ordinary table, so the online-backup copy carries it into the in-memory DB).
The trade-off is score continuity: iteration times drop noticeably (in my runs, ~15% for the stock-Rails sequence), so historical comparisons would need a flag day. Results between Ruby versions/JITs remain comparable in kind either way — every configuration pays or saves the same amount. Happy to send a PR for either variant if there's interest.
Guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Línea de trabajo
Comienza en benchmarks/lobsters/benchmark.rb e inspecciona cómo la copia de seguridad restaura db/production.sqlite3 en memoria. Ejecuta la reproducción proporcionada desde benchmarks/lobsters/ para confirmar los planes de consulta con y sin estadísticas, y compara las dos ubicaciones propuestas para conservarlas. Se considera terminado cuando el benchmark respaldado por fixtures usa las estadísticas del planificador fuera de la región cronometrada y se verifican los tiempos de las rutas afectadas y el plan de consulta.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Evaluación
- Stack tecnológico
- ruby, sqlite
- Área
- databases, performance
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Dificultad
- 3/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 1-2 días
- Estado de actividad
- Activo
- Claridad
- Bien especificado
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 78/100