Public Cloud Databases - Evaluate using Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO) for OVH services
... / Evaluate using Profile-Gu...
BMPCreated with Sketch.BMPZIPCreated with Sketch.ZIPXLSCreated with Sketch.XLSTXTCreated with Sketch.TXTPPTCreated with Sketch.PPTPNGCreated with Sketch.PNGPDFCreated with Sketch.PDFJPGCreated with Sketch.JPGGIFCreated with Sketch.GIFDOCCreated with Sketch.DOC Error Created with Sketch.
Frage

Evaluate using Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO) for OVH services

Von
AliaksandrZ
Erstellungsdatum 2024-02-19 08:36:31 (edited on 2024-09-04 14:25:26) in Public Cloud Databases

Hi!

I research a topic about using runtime-based compiler optimization techniques like Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO) and Post-Link Optimization (PLO) across different projects. All my current findings are available in my repo on GitHub: https://github.com/zamazan4ik/awesome-pgo (and a semi-finished article is available at https://github.com/zamazan4ik/awesome-pgo/blob/main/article/article.md). According to my findings, PGO helps with achieving better performance in many cases, including databases (like PostgreSQL, MariaDB, Redis, ClickHouse, SQLite, and many others), log solutions, compilers, etc.

Since OVH provides many open-source projects like databases in a SaaS way, I wonder - does OVH perform PGO/PLO optimizations on them internally? I tried to find any information about that but found nothing.

If OVH already uses PGO for its open-source-based projects internally - could you please share the performance win numbers from enabling PGO/PLO for these projects? If not, did you consider enabling PGO/PLO for them? Bringing such optimizations to the cloud can help with reducing Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) and help with achieving better performance for the OVH cloud services (and it consequently makes OVH customers happier since they also observe better performance in their OVH-based applications).

Thank you.

P.S. Not sure if the "Database" location is the best location for such questions. Feel free to change it if my choice was wrong here.