REVIEW 1 cited by
Are Updatable Learned Indexes Ready?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recently, numerous promising results have shown that updatable learned indexes can perform better than traditional indexes with much lower memory space consumption. But it is unknown how these learned indexes compare against each other and against the traditional ones under realistic workloads with changing data distributions and concurrency levels. This makes practitioners still wary about how these new indexes would actually behave in practice. To fill this gap, this paper conducts the first comprehensive evaluation on updatable learned indexes. Our evaluation uses ten real datasets and various workloads to challenge learned indexes in three aspects: performance, memory space efficiency and robustness. Based on the results, we give a series of takeaways that can guide the future development and deployment of learned indexes.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Evaluating Learned Indexes in LSM-tree Systems: Benchmarks,Insights and Design Choices
A unified benchmark shows learned indexes beat fence pointers on memory-latency tradeoff in LSM-trees, with position boundary and SSTable granularity as the key tuning knobs.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.