The Case for Learned Index Structures

Indexes are models: a B-Tree-Index can be seen as a model to map a key to the position of a record within a sorted array, a Hash-Index as a model to map a key to a position of a record within an unsorted array, and a BitMap-Index as a model to indicate if a data record exists or not. In this exploratory research paper, we start from this premise and posit that all existing index structures can be replaced with other types of models, including deep-learning models, which we term learned indexes. The key idea is that a model can learn the sort order or structure of lookup keys and use this signal to effectively predict the position or existence of records. We theoretically analyze under which conditions learned indexes outperform traditional index structures and describe the main challenges in designing learned index structures. Our initial results show, that by using neural nets we are able to outperform cache-optimized B-Trees by up to 70% in speed while saving an order-of-magnitude in memory over several real-world data sets. More importantly though, we believe that the idea of replacing core components of a data management system through learned models has far reaching implications for future systems designs and that this work just provides a glimpse of what might be possible

A Simple Method for Organizing Nearly Optimal Binary Search Trees

Improving the efficiency of retrieving information concerns users of computer systems involved in many applications- One way of addressing this concern is to organize a sorted sequence into a binary search tree. Knuth\u27s Algorithm K is a bottom-up organization algorithm that always constructs a binary tree which minimizes average search time. However, the cost of executing Algorithm K is prohibitive for a large tree. The aim of this work is to find a less costly method of organizing sorted sequences into nearly-optimal binary search trees. We present a top-down organization method which yields better average search times than top-down methods already available, specifically height-balancing and weight-balancing. The variation in access frequency among the members of a sequence is used to recommend specific values for some of the parameters in this new method of organization. The new method improves considerably on the cost of organization as opposed to the cost of using Algorithm K while producing trees whose average search times are close to minimal. The new algorithm yields an average search time that is usually within 1% of the minimal average search time and for every case attempted has been no worse than 1.5% larger than minimal

Parallel Weighted Random Sampling

Data structures for efficient sampling from a set of weighted items are an important building block of many applications. However, few parallel solutions are known. We close many of these gaps both for shared-memory and distributed-memory machines. We give efficient, fast, and practicable algorithms for sampling single items, k items with/without replacement, permutations, subsets, and reservoirs. We also give improved sequential algorithms for alias table construction and for sampling with replacement. Experiments on shared-memory parallel machines with up to 158 threads show near linear speedups both for construction and queries

Fast Parallel Operations on Search Trees

Using (a,b)-trees as an example, we show how to perform a parallel split with logarithmic latency and parallel join, bulk updates, intersection, union (or merge), and (symmetric) set difference with logarithmic latency and with information theoretically optimal work. We present both asymptotically optimal solutions and simplified versions that perform well in practice - they are several times faster than previous implementations

Optimal (Randomized) Parallel Algorithms in the Binary-Forking Model

In this paper we develop optimal algorithms in the binary-forking model for a variety of fundamental problems, including sorting, semisorting, list ranking, tree contraction, range minima, and ordered set union, intersection and difference. In the binary-forking model, tasks can only fork into two child tasks, but can do so recursively and asynchronously. The tasks share memory, supporting reads, writes and test-and-sets. Costs are measured in terms of work (total number of instructions), and span (longest dependence chain). The binary-forking model is meant to capture both algorithm performance and algorithm-design considerations on many existing multithreaded languages, which are also asynchronous and rely on binary forks either explicitly or under the covers. In contrast to the widely studied PRAM model, it does not assume arbitrary-way forks nor synchronous operations, both of which are hard to implement in modern hardware. While optimal PRAM algorithms are known for the problems studied herein, it turns out that arbitrary-way forking and strict synchronization are powerful, if unrealistic, capabilities. Natural simulations of these PRAM algorithms in the binary-forking model (i.e., implementations in existing parallel languages) incur an $\Omega(\log n)$ overhead in span. This paper explores techniques for designing optimal algorithms when limited to binary forking and assuming asynchrony. All algorithms described in this paper are the first algorithms with optimal work and span in the binary-forking model. Most of the algorithms are simple. Many are randomized

Performance Anomalies in Concurrent Data Structure Microbenchmarks

Recent decades have witnessed a surge in the development of concurrent data structures with an increasing interest in data structures implementing concurrent sets (CSets). Microbenchmarking tools are frequently utilized to evaluate and compare the performance differences across concurrent data structures. The underlying structure and design of the microbenchmarks themselves can play a hidden but influential role in performance results. However, the impact of microbenchmark design has not been well investigated. In this work, we illustrate instances where concurrent data structure performance results reported by a microbenchmark can vary 10-100x depending on the microbenchmark implementation details. We investigate factors leading to performance variance across three popular microbenchmarks and outline cases in which flawed microbenchmark design can lead to an inversion of performance results between two concurrent data structure implementations. We further derive a prescriptive approach for best practices in the design and utilization of concurrent data structure microbenchmarks