Ryan Marcus
Nesime Tatbul
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Recent efforts applying machine learning techniques to query optimization have shown few practical gains due to substantive training overhead, inability to adapt to changes, and poor tail performance. Motivated by these difficulties, we introduce Bao (the Bandit optimizer). Bao takes advantage of the wisdom built into existing query optimizers by providing per-query optimization hints. Bao combines modern tree convolutional neural networks with Thompson sampling, a well-studied reinforcement learning algorithm. As a result, Bao automatically learns from its mistakes and adapts to changes in query workloads, data, and schema. Experimentally, we demonstrate that Bao can quickly learn strategies that improve end-to-end query execution performance, including tail latency, for several workloads containing longrunning queries. In cloud environments, we show that Bao can offer both reduced costs and better performance compared with a commercial system.
- Google Cloud Platform, https://cloud.google.com/.Google Scholar
- C. Anagnostopoulos and P. Triantafillou. Learning to accurately COUNT with query-driven predictive analytics. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Big Data '15, pages 14--23, Oct. 2015.Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Chapelle and L. Li. An empirical evaluation of Thompson sampling. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS'11, 2011.Google Scholar
- M. Collier and H. U. Llorens. Deep Contextual Multi-armed Bandits. arXiv:1807.09809 [cs, stat], July 2018.Google Scholar
- B. Ding, S. Das, R. Marcus, W. Wu, S. Chaudhuri, and V. R. Narasayya. AI Meets AI: Leveraging Query Executions to Improve Index Recommendations. In 38th ACM Special Interest Group in Data Management, SIGMOD '19, 2019.Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Duggan, O. Papaemmanouil, U. Cetintemel, and E. Upfal. Contender: A Resource Modeling Approach for Concurrent Query Performance Prediction. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, EDBT '14, pages 109--120, 2014.Google Scholar
- R. C. Fernandez and S. Madden. Termite: A System for Tunneling Through Heterogeneous Data. In AIDM @ SIGMOD 2019, aiDM '19, 2019.Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Gottschlich, A. Solar-Lezama, N. Tatbul, M. Carbin, M. Rinard, R. Barzilay, S. Amarasinghe, J. B. Tenenbaum, and T. Mattson. The three pillars of machine programming. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on Machine Learning and Programming Languages, MAPL 2018, pages 69--80, Philadelphia, PA, USA, June 2018. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. B. Guo and K. Daudjee. Research challenges in deep reinforcement learning-based join query optimization. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Exploiting Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Data Management, aiDM '20, pages 1--6, Portland, Oregon, June 2020. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Jain, B. Howe, J. Yan, and T. Cruanes. Query2Vec: An Evaluation of NLP Techniques for Generalized Workload Analytics. arXiv:1801.05613 [cs], Feb. 2018.Google Scholar
- T. Kaftan, M. Balazinska, A. Cheung, and J. Gehrke. Cuttlefish: A Lightweight Primitive for Adaptive Query Processing. arXiv preprint, Feb. 2018.Google Scholar
- A. Kipf, T. Kipf, B. Radke, V. Leis, P. Boncz, and A. Kemper. Learned Cardinalities: Estimating Correlated Joins with Deep Learning. In 9th Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research, CIDR '19, 2019.Google Scholar
- T. Kraska, A. Beutel, E. H. Chi, J. Dean, and N. Polyzotis. The Case for Learned Index Structures. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD '18, New York, NY, USA, 2018. ACM.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Krishnan, Z. Yang, K. Goldberg, J. Hellerstein, and I. Stoica. Learning to Optimize Join Queries With Deep Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:1808.03196 [cs], Aug. 2018.Google Scholar
- V. Leis, A. Gubichev, A. Mirchev, P. Boncz, A. Kemper, and T. Neumann. How Good Are Query Optimizers, Really? PVLDB, 9(3):204--215, 2015.Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Liu, M. Xu, Z. Yu, V. Corvinelli, and C. Zuzarte. Cardinality Estimation Using Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, CASCON '15, pages 53--59, Riverton, NJ, USA, 2015. IBM Corp.Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Lohman. Is Query Optimization a ?"Solved" Problem? In ACM SIGMOD Blog, ACM Blog '14, 2014.Google Scholar
- R. Marcus, P. Negi, H. Mao, N. Tatbul, M. Alizadeh, and T. Kraska. Bao: Making Learned Query Optimization Practical. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD '21, China, June 2021.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Marcus, P. Negi, H. Mao, C. Zhang, M. Alizadeh, T. Kraska, O. Papaemmanouil, and N. Tatbul. Neo: A Learned Query Optimizer. PVLDB, 12(11):1705--1718, 2019.Google Scholar
- R. Marcus and O. Papaemmanouil. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Join Order Enumeration. In First International Workshop on Exploiting Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Data Management, aiDM @ SIGMOD '18, Houston, TX, 2018.Google Scholar
- T. M. Mitchell. The Need for Biases in Learning Generalizations. Technical report, 1980.Google Scholar
- L. Mou, G. Li, L. Zhang, T. Wang, and Z. Jin. Convolutional Neural Networks over Tree Structures for Programming Language Processing. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI '16, pages 1287--1293, Phoenix, Arizona, 2016. AAAI Press.Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Negi, M. Interlandi, R. Marcus, M. Alizadeh, T. Kraska, M. Friedman, and A. Jindal. Steering Query Optimizers: A Practical Take on Big Data Workloads. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD '21, pages 2557--2569, Virtual Event China, June 2021. ACM.Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Negi, R. Marcus, H. Mao, N. Tatbul, T. Kraska, and M. Alizadeh. Cost-Guided Cardinality Estimation: Focus Where it Matters. In Workshop on Self-Managing Databases, SMDB @ ICDE '20, 2020.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Ortiz, M. Balazinska, J. Gehrke, and S. S. Keerthi. Learning State Representations for Query Optimization with Deep Reinforcement Learning. In 2nd Workshop on Data Managmeent for End-to-End Machine Learning, DEEM '18, 2018.Google Scholar
- J. Ortiz, M. Balazinska, J. Gehrke, and S. S. Keerthi. An Empirical Analysis of Deep Learning for Cardinality Estimation. arXiv:1905.06425 [cs], Sept. 2019.Google Scholar
- Y. Park, S. Zhong, and B. Mozafari. QuickSel: Quick Selectivity Learning with Mixture Models. arXiv:1812.10568 [cs], Dec. 2018.Google Scholar
- A. Pavlo, E. P. C. Jones, and S. Zdonik. On Predictive Modeling for Optimizing Transaction Execution in Parallel OLTP Systems. PVLDB, 5(2):86--96, 2011.Google Scholar
- A. G. Read. DeWitt clauses: Can we protect purchasers without hurting Microsoft. Rev. Litig., 25:387, 2006.Google Scholar
- P. G. Selinger, M. M. Astrahan, D. D. Chamberlin, R. A. Lorie, and T. G. Price. Access Path Selection in a Relational Database Management System. In J. Mylopolous and M. Brodie, editors, SIGMOD '79, SIGMOD '79, pages 511--522, San Francisco (CA), 1979. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Shrainik Jain, Jiaqi Yan, Thiery Cruanes, and Bill Howe. Database-Agnostic Workload Management. In 9th Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research, CIDR '19, 2019.Google Scholar
- M. Stillger, G. M. Lohman, V. Markl, and M. Kandil. LEO - DB2's LEarning Optimizer. In VLDB, VLDB '01, pages 19--28, 2001.Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Sun and G. Li. An end-to-end learning-based cost estimator. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 13(3):307--319, Nov. 2019.Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. R. Thompson. On the Likelihood that One Unknown Probability Exceeds Another in View of the Evidence of Two Samples. Biometrika, 1933.Google Scholar
- I. Trummer, S. Moseley, D. Maram, S. Jo, and J. Antonakakis. SkinnerDB: Regret-bounded Query Evaluation via Reinforcement Learning. PVLDB, 11(12):2074--2077, 2018.Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Tzoumas, T. Sellis, and C. Jensen. A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Adaptive Query Processing. Technical Reports, June 2008.Google Scholar
- Z. Yang, A. Kamsetty, S. Luan, E. Liang, Y. Duan, X. Chen, and I. Stoica. NeuroCard: One Cardinality Estimator for All Tables. arXiv:2006.08109 [cs], June 2020.Google Scholar
- Z. Yang, E. Liang, A. Kamsetty, C. Wu, Y. Duan, X. Chen, P. Abbeel, J. M. Hellerstein, S. Krishnan, and I. Stoica. Deep unsupervised cardinality estimation. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 13(3):279--292, Nov. 2019.Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Zhou. A Survey on Contextual Multi-armed Bandits. arXiv:1508.03326 [cs], Feb. 2016.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Bao: Making Learned Query Optimization Practical
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Bao: Making Learned Query Optimization Practical
SIGMOD '21: Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of DataRecent efforts applying machine learning techniques to query optimization have shown few practical gains due to substantive training overhead, inability to adapt to changes, and poor tail performance. Motivated by these difficulties, we introduce Bao (...
The Effect of Artificial Neural Network Model Combined with Six Tumor Markers in Auxiliary Diagnosis of Lung Cancer
To evaluate the diagnosis potential of artificial neural network (ANN) model combined with six tumor markers in auxiliary diagnosis of lung cancer, to differentiate lung cancer from lung benign disease, normal control, and gastrointestinal cancers. ...
Equivalence and minimization of conjunctive queries under combined semantics
ICDT '12: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Database TheoryThe problems of query containment, equivalence, and minimization are fundamental problems in the context of query processing and optimization. In their classic work [2] published in 1977, Chandra and Merlin solved the three problems for the language of ...
Comments