Are We Ready For Learned Cardinality Estimation?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.06743v3
• Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 23:35:27 GMT
• Title: Are We Ready For Learned Cardinality Estimation?
• Authors: Xiaoying Wang, Changbo Qu, Weiyuan Wu, Jiannan Wang, Qingqing Zhou
• Abstract summary: We show that learned models are indeed more accurate than traditional methods, but they often suffer from high training and inference costs. Secondly, we explore whether these learned models are ready for dynamic environments (i.e., frequent data updates) Our results show that the performance of learned methods can be greatly affected by the changes in correlation, skewness, or domain size.
• Score: 6.703418426908341
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Cardinality estimation is a fundamental but long unresolved problem in query optimization. Recently, multiple papers from different research groups consistently report that learned models have the potential to replace existing cardinality estimators. In this paper, we ask a forward-thinking question: Are we ready to deploy these learned cardinality models in production? Our study consists of three main parts. Firstly, we focus on the static environment (i.e., no data updates) and compare five new learned methods with eight traditional methods on four real-world datasets under a unified workload setting. The results show that learned models are indeed more accurate than traditional methods, but they often suffer from high training and inference costs. Secondly, we explore whether these learned models are ready for dynamic environments (i.e., frequent data updates). We find that they cannot catch up with fast data up-dates and return large errors for different reasons. For less frequent updates, they can perform better but there is no clear winner among themselves. Thirdly, we take a deeper look into learned models and explore when they may go wrong. Our results show that the performance of learned methods can be greatly affected by the changes in correlation, skewness, or domain size. More importantly, their behaviors are much harder to interpret and often unpredictable. Based on these findings, we identify two promising research directions (control the cost of learned models and make learned models trustworthy) and suggest a number of research opportunities. We hope that our study can guide researchers and practitioners to work together to eventually push learned cardinality estimators into real database systems.

Related papers

• CardBench: A Benchmark for Learned Cardinality Estimation in Relational Databases [17.46316633654637]
  Cardinality estimation is crucial for enabling high query performance in databases. There is no systematic benchmark or datasets which allows researchers to evaluate the progress made by new learned approaches. We release a benchmark, containing thousands of queries over 20 distinct real-world databases for learned cardinality estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T23:25:25Z)
• Zero-shot Retrieval: Augmenting Pre-trained Models with Search Engines [83.65380507372483]
  Large pre-trained models can dramatically reduce the amount of task-specific data required to solve a problem, but they often fail to capture domain-specific nuances out of the box. This paper shows how to leverage recent advances in NLP and multi-modal learning to augment a pre-trained model with search engine retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T05:33:28Z)
• Synthetic Model Combination: An Instance-wise Approach to Unsupervised Ensemble Learning [92.89846887298852]
  Consider making a prediction over new test data without any opportunity to learn from a training set of labelled data. Give access to a set of expert models and their predictions alongside some limited information about the dataset used to train them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-11T10:20:31Z)
• Exploring Strategies for Generalizable Commonsense Reasoning with Pre-trained Models [62.28551903638434]
  We measure the impact of three different adaptation methods on the generalization and accuracy of models. Experiments with two models show that fine-tuning performs best, by learning both the content and the structure of the task, but suffers from overfitting and limited generalization to novel answers. We observe that alternative adaptation methods like prefix-tuning have comparable accuracy, but generalize better to unseen answers and are more robust to adversarial splits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-07T03:13:06Z)
• Revisiting Contrastive Methods for Unsupervised Learning of Visual Representations [78.12377360145078]
  Contrastive self-supervised learning has outperformed supervised pretraining on many downstream tasks like segmentation and object detection. In this paper, we first study how biases in the dataset affect existing methods. We show that current contrastive approaches work surprisingly well across: (i) object- versus scene-centric, (ii) uniform versus long-tailed and (iii) general versus domain-specific datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-10T17:59:13Z)
• Distill on the Go: Online knowledge distillation in self-supervised learning [1.1470070927586016]
  Recent works have shown that wider and deeper models benefit more from self-supervised learning than smaller models. We propose Distill-on-the-Go (DoGo), a self-supervised learning paradigm using single-stage online knowledge distillation. Our results show significant performance gain in the presence of noisy and limited labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-20T09:59:23Z)
• Dataset Cartography: Mapping and Diagnosing Datasets with Training Dynamics [118.75207687144817]
  We introduce Data Maps, a model-based tool to characterize and diagnose datasets. We leverage a largely ignored source of information: the behavior of the model on individual instances during training. Our results indicate that a shift in focus from quantity to quality of data could lead to robust models and improved out-of-distribution generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-22T20:19:41Z)
• Relation-Guided Representation Learning [53.60351496449232]
  We propose a new representation learning method that explicitly models and leverages sample relations. Our framework well preserves the relations between samples. By seeking to embed samples into subspace, we show that our method can address the large-scale and out-of-sample problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-11T10:57:45Z)
• Bayesian Meta-Prior Learning Using Empirical Bayes [3.666114237131823]
  We propose a hierarchical Empirical Bayes approach that addresses the absence of informative priors, and the inability to control parameter learning rates. Our method learns empirical meta-priors from the data itself and uses them to decouple the learning rates of first-order and second-order features. Our findings are promising, as optimizing over sparse data is often a challenge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-04T05:08:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.