skip to main content
10.1145/3626246.3653394acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Intelligent Scaling in Amazon Redshift

Published: 09 June 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Cloud-based data warehouses are built to be easy to use, requiring minimal intervention from customers as their workloads scale. However, there are still many dimensions of a workload that they do not scale with automatically. For example, in cloud-managed clusters, large ad-hoc queries and ETL workloads must use the same cluster size provisioned for the rest of the workload, and warehouse size does not automatically grow as the underlying data grows in size, causing queries to slow down. In this paper, we describe RAIS, the latest collection of AI-powered scaling and optimization techniques in Amazon Redshift, released in preview at re:Invent 2023, which enable it to scale both vertically and horizontally to adapt to all types of workload variability. RAIS dynamically provisions compute resources to run heavy queries efficiently and automatically optimizes warehouse size for the customer's workload, even as it shifts over time. We show that, depending on the workload, RAIS improves either cost or average query execution time by up to 7.6× and 14.2×, respectively, over existing baselines.

References

[1]
Divyakant Agrawal, Amr El Abbadi, Sudipto Das, and Aaron J Elmore. 2011. Database scalability, elasticity, and autonomy in the cloud. In International conference on database systems for advanced applications. Springer, 2--15.
[2]
AWS Amazon. 2023. Amazon Redshift pricing. https://aws.amazon.com/redshift/pricing/.
[3]
Nikos Armenatzoglou, Sanuj Basu, Naga Bhanoori, Mengchu Cai, Naresh Chainani, Kiran Chinta, Venkatraman Govindaraju, Todd J Green, Monish Gupta, Sebastian Hillig, et al. 2022. Amazon Redshift re-invented. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Management of Data. 2205--2217.
[4]
Yun Chi, Hyun Jin Moon, and Hakan Hacigümücs. 2011a. ICBS: Incremental Cost-Based Scheduling under Piecewise Linear SLAs. Proc. VLDB Endow., Vol. 4, 9, 563--574. https://doi.org/10.14778/2002938.2002942
[5]
Yun Chi, Hyun Jin Moon, Hakan Hacigümücs, and Junichi Tatemura. 2011b. SLA-Tree: A Framework for Efficiently Supporting SLA-Based Decisions in Cloud Computing. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (Uppsala, Sweden) (EDBT/ICDT '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 129--140. https://doi.org/10.1145/1951365.1951383
[6]
Google Cloud. 2023. What is BI Engine? https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs/bi-engine-intro.
[7]
Songyun Duan, Vamsidhar Thummala, and Shivnath Babu. 2009. Tuning Database Configuration Parameters with ITuned. Proc. VLDB Endow., Vol. 2, 1, 1246--1257. https://doi.org/10.14778/1687627.1687767
[8]
Hongzi Mao, Malte Schwarzkopf, Shaileshh Bojja Venkatakrishnan, Zili Meng, and Mohammad Alizadeh. 2019. Learning Scheduling Algorithms for Data Processing Clusters. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication (Beijing, China) (SIGCOMM '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 270--288. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341302.3342080
[9]
Ryan Marcus, Parimarjan Negi, Hongzi Mao, Nesime Tatbul, Mohammad Alizadeh, and Tim Kraska. 2021. Bao: Making learned query optimization practical. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data. 1275--1288.
[10]
Ryan Marcus and Olga Papaemmanouil. 2016. WiSeDB: A Learning-Based Workload Management Advisor for Cloud Databases. Proc. VLDB Endow., Vol. 9, 10, 780--791. https://doi.org/10.14778/2977797.2977804
[11]
Ibrahim Sabek, Tenzin Samten Ukyab, and Tim Kraska. 2022. LSched: A Workload-Aware Learned Query Scheduler for Analytical Database Systems. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Management of Data (Philadelphia, PA, USA) (SIGMOD '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1228--1242. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514221.3526158
[12]
Gaurav Saxena, Mohammad Rahman, Naresh Chainani, Chunbin Lin, George Caragea, Fahim Chowdhury, Ryan Marcus, Tim Kraska, Ippokratis Pandis, and Balakrishnan Narayanaswamy. 2023. Auto-WLM: Machine learning enhanced workload management in Amazon Redshift. In Companion of the 2023 International Conference on Management of Data. 225--237.
[13]
Junjay Tan, Thanaa Ghanem, Matthew Perron, Xiangyao Yu, Michael Stonebraker, David DeWitt, Marco Serafini, Ashraf Aboulnaga, and Tim Kraska. 2019. Choosing a Cloud DBMS: Architectures and Tradeoffs. Proc. VLDB Endow., Vol. 12, 12, 2170--2182. https://doi.org/10.14778/3352063.3352133
[14]
Dana Van Aken, Andrew Pavlo, Geoffrey J. Gordon, and Bohan Zhang. 2017. Automatic Database Management System Tuning Through Large-Scale Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data (Chicago, Illinois, USA) (SIGMOD '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1009--1024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3035918.3064029

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SIGMOD/PODS '24: Companion of the 2024 International Conference on Management of Data
June 2024
694 pages
ISBN:9798400704222
DOI:10.1145/3626246
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 09 June 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. amazon redshift
  2. cloud databases
  3. database optimization
  4. elastic scaling
  5. intelligent scaling
  6. machine learning
  7. relational databases
  8. resource allocation

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

SIGMOD/PODS '24
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 785 of 4,003 submissions, 20%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)164
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)18
Reflects downloads up to 04 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media