Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Sign up

eval: report partial Alibaba dashboard measurements - #651

Open
zzylol wants to merge 4 commits into
eval/topk-dashboard-autosketch from
eval/alibaba-dashboard-observations
Open

eval: report partial Alibaba dashboard measurements #651
zzylol wants to merge 4 commits into
eval/topk-dashboard-autosketch from
eval/alibaba-dashboard-observations

Conversation

@zzylol

@zzylol zzylol commented Sep 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

Preserve the real Alibaba dashboard measurements collected before the user requested stopping the experiment.

What

Add the Rust comparison harness, data preparation and evaluation design, plus 15 completed service runs out of 54 planned runs. Include raw plans/measurements, dataset provenance, a partial report and performance plots. Execution is stopped; this is not the completed experiment.

How

Prepare all 240 official three-minute archives (12 hours, 2,646,269,187 retained observations). Calibrate on a 10M-event reservoir from hours 0–6; replay hours 6–12 without sampling after one hour of warmup. Compare six baselines on count and Top-3 dashboards with 1m/10m/60m windows refreshed every minute.

Before this PR

The dashboard comparison branch had no executable Alibaba observation-contract experiment or these real-data measurements.

After this PR

Reviewers can inspect the partial report, plots and raw per-query samples, including planning, update, merge, readout, payload memory and accuracy violations. This PR is stacked on #602.

Trial 0 total CPU seconds:

Baseline Update Merge Readout Accuracy violations / 2160
Exact-pane 66.95 10.35 4.07 0
Exact-scan 7.90 0 2270.60 0
Analytical sizing 1076.88 10.39 9.68 1102
AutoSketch CPU extension 3287.68 10.72 1.15 378
ERP-NoSharing 3289.36 10.69 1.15 378
ERP shared-or-local → Exact fallback 67.03 10.23 3.93 0

Verification

  • All 15 completed runs pass artifact checks for event counts, endpoints, plan identity, timers, violations and shared-merge accounting; completed exact references have zero accuracy violations.
  • Seven Rust correctness tests passed before execution; preparation tests are separate from real performance evidence.
  • Four reporting-validation tests pass, including a regression for insignificant JSON floating-point round-trip differences; integer configuration fields remain exact.
  • No performance rerun was started after the stop request. The interrupted AutoSketch third run is excluded.
  • Product screenshots: not applicable; measured plots are included instead.

Limitations

Service repetitions are incomplete/unbalanced. Edge and latency catalogs exist, but their held-out runs were not started. The displayed table is consistently trial 0, not a three-trial aggregate. ERP uses a custom calibration catalog, not synthetic nearest-shape matching; the shared ERP result is exact fallback, not a successful approximate-sketch result. AutoSketch is a CPU adaptation with extensions. Analytical sizing is not full cost-model optimization. Timers measure operator regions, not deployed backend/network latency; memory is logical payload, not isolated RSS. Original datasets and oracle caches are not vendored into Git.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /