Adaptive Query Processing In CTP 2.0

Joe Sack has a couple blog posts on adaptive query processing enhancements in SQL Server 2017 CTP 2.0.  First, Batch Mode Adaptive Joins:

We have seen numerous cases where providing a specific join hint solved query performance issues for our customers.  However, the drawback of adding a hint is that we remove join algorithm decisions from the optimizer for that statement. While fixing a short-term issue, the hard-coded hint may not be the optimal decision as data distributions shift over time.

Another scenario is where we do not know up front what the optimal join should be, for example, with a parameter sensitive query where a low or high number of rows may flow through the plan based on the actual parameter value.

With these scenarios in mind, the Query Processing team introduced the ability to sense a bad join choice in a plan and then dynamically switch to a better join strategy during execution.

That one’s really cool.  Joe also talks about interleaved execution for multi-statement TVFs:

SQL Server has historically used a unidirectional “pipeline” for optimizing and executing queries.  During optimization, the cardinality estimation process is responsible for providing row count estimates for operators in order to derive estimated costs.  The estimated costs help determine which plan gets selected for use in execution.  If cardinality estimates are incorrect, we will still end up using the original plan despite the poor original assumptions.

Interleaved execution changes the unidirectional boundary between the optimization and execution phases for a single-query execution and enables plans to adapt based on the revised estimates. During optimization if we encounter a candidate for interleaved execution, which for this first version will be multi-statement table valued functions (MSTVFs), we will pause optimization, execute the applicable subtree, capture accurate cardinality estimates and then resume optimization for downstream operations.

The goal here is to make Table-Valued Functions viable from a performance perspective.  The team has a long way to go there, but they’re working on it.  Also, Joe gives a shout out to Arun Sirpal, frequent curatee.

Related Posts

I/O Latency And Performance Tuning

Andy Galbraith is starting a new toolbox series.  His first post is an introduction and a look at drive latency: You look at the numbers again, and now you find that disk latency, which had previously been fine, is now completely in the tank during the business day, showing that I/O delays are through the […]

Read More

How Functions Affect Data Retrieval Performance

Daniel Janik shows one of the many pain points around user-defined functions in SQL Server: Note that Query 1 uses a function around the column and this causes a scan which increases IO and CPU utilization. This is because every value in the column for the whole table must have the hyphen removed to see […]

Read More

Categories

April 2017
MTWTFSS
« Mar May »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930