Follow up #16061. Tighten score supplier cost estimation and introduce SortedSkipperScorerSupplier#16070
Merged
Merged
Conversation
romseygeek
reviewed
May 15, 2026
Contributor
romseygeek
left a comment
romseygeek
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice! I left a couple of comments.
Co-authored-by: Alan Woodward <romseygeek@gmail.com>
iverase
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 15, 2026
…e SortedSkipperScorerSupplier (#16070)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In #16061, score estimation depends on a hardcoded value that represents the skipper block size. That feels wrong and we should be able to get the size of the block we might need to inspect for the skipper itself. This PR proposes that, in the case we detect we might need to inspect a skipper, we take the size of the skipper for cost estimation.
In theory, it means that we might need to read one extra skipper block but it should be ok as the skipper should be already in the page cache so it should be fast.
In addition, I am extracting the logic in the SortedSkipperScorerSupplier so it can be easily reused.