apache
Use `selectinload` in trigger
closes: #33647
As mentioned by @arunravimv in #33647, we have added this patch to our own Airflow deployment and have noticed improvements in triggerer performance.
Following are the Explain Analyze outputs for the two SQL Alchemy relationship loading strategies
Triggerer Process
Using joinedload in bulk_fetch method
-> Nested loop left join (cost=101 rows=95) (actual time=0.22..0.359 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Nested loop left join (cost=67.8 rows=95) (actual time=0.21..0.348 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Nested loop left join (cost=34.6 rows=95) (actual time=0.204..0.338 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Filter: (`trigger`.id in (969,968,984)) (cost=1.36 rows=3) (actual time=0.049..0.0565 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Index range scan on trigger using PRIMARY over (id = 968) OR (id = 969) OR (id = 984) (cost=1.36 rows=3) (actual time=0.048..0.0545 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Nested loop inner join (cost=35.9 rows=31.7) (actual time=0.0915..0.0932 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Index lookup on task_instance_1 using ti_trigger_id (trigger_id=`trigger`.id) (cost=8.97 rows=31.7) (actual time=0.0716..0.0731 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Single-row index lookup on dag_run_1 using dag_run_dag_id_run_id_key (dag_id=task_instance_1.dag_id, run_id=task_instance_1.run_id) (cost=0.251 rows=1) (actual time=0.0194..0.0195 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Single-row index lookup on trigger_1 using PRIMARY (id=task_instance_1.trigger_id) (cost=0.251 rows=1) (actual time=0.00301..0.00305 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Single-row index lookup on job_1 using PRIMARY (id=trigger_1.triggerer_id) (cost=0.251 rows=1) (actual time=0.00316..0.00321 rows=1 loops=3)
Using selectinload in bulk_fetch method
-> Nested loop inner join (cost=5.26 rows=3) (actual time=0.0895..0.362 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Nested loop left join (cost=4.21 rows=3) (actual time=0.065..0.313 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Nested loop left join (cost=3.16 rows=3) (actual time=0.0521..0.298 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Index range scan on task_instance using ti_trigger_id over (trigger_id = 968) OR (trigger_id = 969) OR (trigger_id = 984), with index condition: (task_instance.trigger_id in (969,968,984)) (cost=2.11 rows=3) (actual time=0.0399..0.273 rows=3 loops=1)
-> Single-row index lookup on trigger_1 using PRIMARY (id=task_instance.trigger_id) (cost=0.283 rows=1) (actual time=0.00755..0.00759 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Single-row index lookup on job_1 using PRIMARY (id=trigger_1.triggerer_id) (cost=0.283 rows=1) (actual time=0.00454..0.00458 rows=1 loops=3)
-> Single-row index lookup on dag_run_1 using dag_run_dag_id_run_id_key (dag_id=task_instance.dag_id, run_id=task_instance.run_id) (cost=0.283 rows=1) (actual time=0.016..0.016 rows=1 loops=3)
triggerview/list API
Using joined for relationship between TaskInstance and Trigger
-> Sort: `trigger`.id DESC (actual time=0.0215..0.0215 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Stream results (cost=8234 rows=79751) (actual time=0.0169..0.0169 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Nested loop left join (cost=8234 rows=79751) (actual time=0.016..0.016 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Table scan on trigger (cost=0.35 rows=1) (actual time=0.0152..0.0152 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Nested loop inner join (cost=33331 rows=79751) (never executed)
-> Table scan on dag_run_1 (cost=5419 rows=51596) (never executed)
-> Filter: (task_instance_1.trigger_id = `trigger`.id) (cost=0.386 rows=1.55) (never executed)
-> Index lookup on task_instance_1 using ti_dag_run (dag_id=dag_run_1.dag_id, run_id=dag_run_1.run_id) (cost=0.386 rows=1.55) (never executed)
Using selectin for relationship between TaskInstance and Trigger
-> Nested loop inner join (cost=8.41 rows=8) (actual time=0.0409..0.0409 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Index range scan on task_instance using ti_trigger_id over (trigger_id = 109) OR (trigger_id = 110) OR (6 more), with index condition: (task_instance.trigger_id in (116,115,114,113,112,111,110,109)) (cost=5.61 rows=8) (actual time=0.0402..0.0402 rows=0 loops=1)
-> Single-row index lookup on dag_run_1 using dag_run_dag_id_run_id_key (dag_id=task_instance.dag_id, run_id=task_instance.run_id) (cost=0.263 rows=1) (never executed)
From above Explain Analyze results, we can see that using selectinload is gives more optimal performance for triggerer process as well as the triggerview list api.
Holding shift activates the selection box, but weird that it stops panning by scrolling. Definitely a bug, thanks!
@peterkogo - Just to clarify. Doesn't shift+mouse-down+drag activate the selection box?
If shift+scroll is not meant for scrolling horizontally (like in figma, obsidian, excalidraw, native overflow-x) what is the key-bind for scrolling horizontally 😅? panOnScrollMode references moving both directions / horizontally. Is this only possible on a trackpad and not with a mouse scroll wheel?
Sorry, haven't used a mouse without a horizontal scroll wheel in a while. Totally forgot that shift+scroll is horizontal scrolling... Now I understand the problem. I guess we are doing preventDefault when pressing down the shift button for drawing selectionBox. If you set selectionKey to something other than "Shift" it works.
haven't used a mouse without a horizontal scroll wheel in a while
I read this and thought "Wow, I didn't even know that existed". So I googled mouse with horizontal scroll wheel, only to find my exact mouse was the first mouse that popped up. I never realize that thingy on the side was a horizontal scroll 🤣.
Thanks for the selectionKey workaround! I'll give that a shot!
