Commit graph

7 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
5f9598af6a feat(db-bench): prove batches form — the write-concurrent leg, T4
databasev2 4 part A, task 4. Scope extended with developer approval: the
plan authorised touching the sample only for observability, but no
existing leg has enough concurrent durable writes to exercise group
commit at all, so the payoff was unevaluable either way.

The finding that forced it:

- `mix` writes on one op in ten with C=4 (all_mode calls mix_mode(n/10,
  4); Mixer writes on i % 10 == 9), so the quick run performs 20 writes
  total. Measured mean batch 1.01 over 3112 barriers, peak 3
- that is a property of the WORKLOAD, not the mechanism: peak 3 of a
  possible 4 shows batches form whenever writes actually coincide

- `wmix N C` added: every op a durable write, C at once. Updates rather
  than inserts, so it is comparable to mixwrite and the row count stays
  flat. Histogram kind 2 — a replayed store still holds the seeding run's
  kind-0/1 Hist rows and merging those would report someone else's
  latencies
- WO_WAL_STATS=1 prints one line at exit: batches, records, peak_batch,
  peak_staged. Opt-in, because it would otherwise pollute every durable
  program's output. Counters live in wo_wal; no builtin, the numbers are
  diagnostic and not part of the language

Measured, and it scales with concurrency exactly as designed:

- C = 4 / 16 / 64 -> mean batch 1.13 / 1.76 / 5.35, peak 3 / 10 / 39
- the gate's own legs: durable.s1 5412 records over 5412 barriers (mean
  1.0, peak 1 — the inline path, one barrier per statement BY DESIGN),
  durable.sN 7757 over 2296 (mean 3.38, peak 28) at 2x the throughput
- peak staged 1372 B settles the no-cap decision with a number: the batch
  is tiny, so the upstream mailbox bound is sufficient

- mean_batch/peak_batch are higher-is-better (the default detector would
  have called bigger batches worse)
- only the batch SHAPE metrics are waived to 100%; wmix throughput and
  latency keep real tolerances (15% s1, 50% sN) — a blanket waiver would
  have left the entire new leg ungated
- the live assertion `mean > 1.0` on the sN leg is what catches inertness
- gate bites: sN wmix ops_sec -60% -> FAIL on exactly that metric, 1 of 86

Verified: db-bench-quick 89 checks 0 failures; baseline refreshed (86
metrics).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-28 09:47:51 +02:00
a8829232dc docs: perf-targets register — measured optimization candidates
- target 1: write path (update-through-query re-probe, triple index
  walk, per-field encode, whole-row WAL update record) — re-measure
  after 23, then decide
- targets 2-4 recorded with owners (DB-RPC by design/24, mutex inbox
  /31, fsync bound /23)
- board pending + comparison README link the register

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-22 17:19:46 +02:00
302a074125 bench: go-sqlite comparison harness + first numbers
- mirrors db-bench schema/modes line-for-line; ram + durable (FULL
  sync) flavors; tmpfs-fsync trap re-confirmed (122k/s lie vs 3.1k/s
  ext4)
- wo wins reads x2.6, query x6.4, durable seed x1.4; sqlite wins ram
  writes x1.9, durable mixed writes x1.4 (update-through-query re-probe
  = named optimization target)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-22 17:12:16 +02:00
881b90e9c7 feat: O(1) read path — index probe wired end to end
- engine: wo_idx_probe answers single-column equality from the index
  hash buckets (idx_hash_key1 reproduces idx_hash bit for bit; verify
  compares exactly as the slab walk did, so results identical);
  composite indexes keep the walk; both executors wired (local + DB
  actor RPC)
- compiler: probe_key_of_where lowers "var.col == key" on an indexed
  column to DB_PROBE; all where guards still run (guard stays the
  final arbiter); keys = ident/int-literal only; Float/Bytes excluded
  (engine raw-eq narrower than VM float-eq)
- measured: reads 1.3k -> 1.3M ops/s, p50 600us -> 1us (~x850);
  query x830; mixread 1.3k -> 89k s1, 21 -> ~1.9k sN
- gate policy moved into the driver (tolerance_for: refresh-proof);
  latency floors max(4x,100us); quick mode skips poll-bound mix
  floors; both tolerance classes proven to bite
- proof: test_table wo_idx_probe suite (RED first), corpus
  query-index-probe 105/0, full battery green, TSan clean, two
  campaigns pass the refreshed baseline

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-22 16:44:56 +02:00
5d6a72bb82 docs: iteration 22 landed — closeout (T6)
- story 22 to done/ with landing banner (numbers, deviations,
  standing multi<TableClass> finding); marker deleted
- board standup from measured numbers; next slice = 31 (has its
  mutex-inbox number now); spec/plan banners LANDED; graph node done
- msgrate floors value/8 (quick's small N spawn-dominated, grazed /4)
- full battery + db-bench-quick 87/0 green; links verified

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-21 16:57:27 +02:00
3a30b4ac3b feat(db-bench): first baseline — the measurement contract (T5)
- bench/baseline.json: 74 metrics from the first full campaign;
  tolerances tuned by a two-run repeatability check (mix* 50%,
  read/query 35%, rest 15% — rationale in _config)
- gate bites: --check mode; doctored copy fails, both real runs 74/0
- headline: durable seed 4.5k/s vs ram 297k/s (23's case); reads
  O(table) at ~1.5k/s; mixread 1280 vs 21 ops/s single-vs-multi
  (the arc's price); msgrate 13.4M vs 2.45M (mutex-inbox number)
- arc delta recorded in story 8; findings in sample README

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-21 16:54:13 +02:00
d1cdf3ed6c feat(db-bench): campaign driver + gate + recipes (T4)
- scripts/db-bench.py (one python driver — bash+python deviation,
  disclosed): ram+durable x 1/N shards, msgrate per shard count,
  restart proof, kill -9 battery vs acked high-water, RSS/fd
  sampling from the mix phase, results JSON, relative+floor gates
- just db-bench / db-bench-quick (quick = floors only)
- quick campaign 14 checks green; gate honestly fails without a
  baseline (--write-baseline is Task 5's first full run)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-21 16:44:25 +02:00