Skip to content

POC: reduce per-row cost in the TDS row decode path - #238

Open
Srinivasan S A (NivasSA) wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
NivasSA:poc/tds-row-decode-optimizations
Open

POC: reduce per-row cost in the TDS row decode path#238
Srinivasan S A (NivasSA) wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
NivasSA:poc/tds-row-decode-optimizations

Conversation

@NivasSA

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Proof of concept, not for merge. Shows five changes and what each is worth.

Measured on 1,499,000 rows of 48 columns. Wall clock 7.45s -> 3.92s. CPU on the reading process 7.35s -> 2.58s. CPU inside mssql-tds 4.69s -> 0.97s. The server stopped blocking on ASYNC_NETWORK_IO, from 4.54s to none.

The five changes:

  1. Resolve each column's type, precision, scale and collation once per result set into a DecodeOp plan, instead of rederiving it from ColumnMetadata on every row.

  2. Add a synchronous row path that decodes a whole ROW or NBCROW token from one borrow of the reader's buffer. It runs two passes, the first to measure and bounds check and the second to decode without checks. It declines when the row crosses a packet boundary, and the async path handles that case.

  3. Remove the two tracing callsites that fired once per row. This was done to measure their cost, not as a proposal.

  4. Offer decoded strings and binaries to the RowWriter as borrows, so a consumer that does not need to own them avoids a copy.

  5. Let the RowWriter supply the destination for a PLP value whose length is declared up front, so large values are read into consumer storage directly.

Known gaps are listed in POC_README.md. The largest is that NOT NULL columns arrive as fixed length TDS types, which are not in the decode plan, so a table of NOT NULL columns gets none of this.

Description

Related Issues

Checklist

  • cargo bfmt passes
  • cargo bclippy passes
  • cargo btest passes
  • New/changed functionality has tests
  • Public API changes are documented

Proof of concept, not for merge. Shows five changes and what each is worth.

Measured on 1,499,000 rows of 48 columns. Wall clock 7.45s -> 3.92s. CPU on
the reading process 7.35s -> 2.58s. CPU inside mssql-tds 4.69s -> 0.97s. The
server stopped blocking on ASYNC_NETWORK_IO, from 4.54s to none.

The five changes:

1. Resolve each column's type, precision, scale and collation once per result
   set into a DecodeOp plan, instead of rederiving it from ColumnMetadata on
   every row.

2. Add a synchronous row path that decodes a whole ROW or NBCROW token from one
   borrow of the reader's buffer. It runs two passes, the first to measure and
   bounds check and the second to decode without checks. It declines when the
   row crosses a packet boundary, and the async path handles that case.

3. Remove the two tracing callsites that fired once per row. This was done to
   measure their cost, not as a proposal.

4. Offer decoded strings and binaries to the RowWriter as borrows, so a consumer
   that does not need to own them avoids a copy.

5. Let the RowWriter supply the destination for a PLP value whose length is
   declared up front, so large values are read into consumer storage directly.

Known gaps are listed in POC_README.md. The largest is that NOT NULL columns
arrive as fixed length TDS types, which are not in the decode plan, so a table
of NOT NULL columns gets none of this.
Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings August 12, 2026 18:45
@NivasSA
Srinivasan S A (NivasSA) requested a review from a team as a code owner August 12, 2026 18:45
@azure-pipelines

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Azure Pipelines:
There may be pipelines that require an authorized user to comment /azp run to run.

@microsoft-github-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Srinivasan S A (@NivasSA) please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]

Options:

  • (default - no company specified) I have sole ownership of intellectual property rights to my Submissions and I am not making Submissions in the course of work for my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree
  • (when company given) I am making Submissions in the course of work for my employer (or my employer has intellectual property rights in my Submissions by contract or applicable law). I have permission from my employer to make Submissions and enter into this Agreement on behalf of my employer. By signing below, the defined term “You” includes me and my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"
Contributor License Agreement

Contribution License Agreement

This Contribution License Agreement (“Agreement”) is agreed to by the party signing below (“You”),
and conveys certain license rights to Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates (“Microsoft”) for Your
contributions to Microsoft open source projects. This Agreement is effective as of the latest signature
date below.

  1. Definitions.
    “Code” means the computer software code, whether in human-readable or machine-executable form,
    that is delivered by You to Microsoft under this Agreement.
    “Project” means any of the projects owned or managed by Microsoft and offered under a license
    approved by the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org).
    “Submit” is the act of uploading, submitting, transmitting, or distributing code or other content to any
    Project, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control
    systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the Project for the purpose of
    discussing and improving that Project, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or
    otherwise designated in writing by You as “Not a Submission.”
    “Submission” means the Code and any other copyrightable material Submitted by You, including any
    associated comments and documentation.
  2. Your Submission. You must agree to the terms of this Agreement before making a Submission to any
    Project. This Agreement covers any and all Submissions that You, now or in the future (except as
    described in Section 4 below), Submit to any Project.
  3. Originality of Work. You represent that each of Your Submissions is entirely Your original work.
    Should You wish to Submit materials that are not Your original work, You may Submit them separately
    to the Project if You (a) retain all copyright and license information that was in the materials as You
    received them, (b) in the description accompanying Your Submission, include the phrase “Submission
    containing materials of a third party:” followed by the names of the third party and any licenses or other
    restrictions of which You are aware, and (c) follow any other instructions in the Project’s written
    guidelines concerning Submissions.
  4. Your Employer. References to “employer” in this Agreement include Your employer or anyone else
    for whom You are acting in making Your Submission, e.g. as a contractor, vendor, or agent. If Your
    Submission is made in the course of Your work for an employer or Your employer has intellectual
    property rights in Your Submission by contract or applicable law, You must secure permission from Your
    employer to make the Submission before signing this Agreement. In that case, the term “You” in this
    Agreement will refer to You and the employer collectively. If You change employers in the future and
    desire to Submit additional Submissions for the new employer, then You agree to sign a new Agreement
    and secure permission from the new employer before Submitting those Submissions.
  5. Licenses.
  • Copyright License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or
    indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license in the
    Submission to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute
    the Submission and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third
    parties.
  • Patent License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or
    indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license under
    Your patent claims that are necessarily infringed by the Submission or the combination of the
    Submission with the Project to which it was Submitted to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell and
    import or otherwise dispose of the Submission alone or with the Project.
  • Other Rights Reserved. Each party reserves all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
    No additional licenses or rights whatsoever (including, without limitation, any implied licenses) are
    granted by implication, exhaustion, estoppel or otherwise.
  1. Representations and Warranties. You represent that You are legally entitled to grant the above
    licenses. You represent that each of Your Submissions is entirely Your original work (except as You may
    have disclosed under Section 3). You represent that You have secured permission from Your employer to
    make the Submission in cases where Your Submission is made in the course of Your work for Your
    employer or Your employer has intellectual property rights in Your Submission by contract or applicable
    law. If You are signing this Agreement on behalf of Your employer, You represent and warrant that You
    have the necessary authority to bind the listed employer to the obligations contained in this Agreement.
    You are not expected to provide support for Your Submission, unless You choose to do so. UNLESS
    REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING, AND EXCEPT FOR THE WARRANTIES
    EXPRESSLY STATED IN SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 6, THE SUBMISSION PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IS
    PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTY OF
    NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
  2. Notice to Microsoft. You agree to notify Microsoft in writing of any facts or circumstances of which
    You later become aware that would make Your representations in this Agreement inaccurate in any
    respect.
  3. Information about Submissions. You agree that contributions to Projects and information about
    contributions may be maintained indefinitely and disclosed publicly, including Your name and other
    information that You submit with Your Submission.
  4. Governing Law/Jurisdiction. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Washington, and
    the parties consent to exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the federal courts sitting in King County,
    Washington, unless no federal subject matter jurisdiction exists, in which case the parties consent to
    exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the Superior Court of King County, Washington. The parties waive all
    defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non-conveniens.
  5. Entire Agreement/Assignment. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties, and
    supersedes any and all prior agreements, understandings or communications, written or oral, between
    the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be assigned by Microsoft.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Proof of concept for reducing per-row TDS decoding overhead through precomputed decode plans, buffered row decoding, borrowed values, and direct PLP destinations.

Changes:

  • Adds a two-pass buffered ROW/NBCROW decoder.
  • Extends RowWriter with borrowed-value and destination-buffer APIs.
  • Adds non-blocking packet reads and an unboxed row API.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 13 out of 13 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
POC_README.md Documents goals, benchmarks, and limitations.
mssql-tds/src/token/tokens.rs Adds cached per-column decode plans.
mssql-tds/src/token/parsers/row_parser.rs Initializes decode-plan state in tests.
mssql-tds/src/token/parsers/nbcrow_parser.rs Initializes decode-plan state in tests.
mssql-tds/src/token/parsers/colmetadata_parser.rs Initializes decode plans during metadata parsing.
mssql-tds/src/io/token_stream.rs Implements buffered two-pass row decoding.
mssql-tds/src/io/packet_reader.rs Adds synchronous buffered-read APIs.
mssql-tds/src/datatypes/sql_string.rs Supports borrowed UTF-8 decoding.
mssql-tds/src/datatypes/row_writer.rs Adds borrowed writes and PLP destinations.
mssql-tds/src/datatypes/decoder.rs Integrates buffered reads and direct PLP storage.
mssql-tds/src/connection/transport/network_transport.rs Implements buffered reads for network transport.
mssql-tds/src/connection/tds_client.rs Removes row tracing and adds an unboxed API.
mssql-tds/src/connection/metadata_retriever.rs Initializes decode-plan state in tests.

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Comment thread POC_README.md
The server stopped waiting on us too. Before the change it spent 4.54 seconds
blocked on `ASYNC_NETWORK_IO`. After the change it spent none.

The unit tests pass. Run them with `cargo test -p mssql-tds --lib`.
Comment on lines +1054 to +1056
if let Some(destination) = writer.string_destination(col, length, encoding_type) {
let result = Self::read_known_plp_bytes(reader, destination).await;
writer.finish_string_destination(col, result.is_ok());
Comment on lines +332 to +336
fn try_receive_row_into_buffered<R: TdsPacketReader + Send + Sync>(
reader: &mut R,
context: &ParserContext,
writer: &mut (dyn RowWriter + Send),
) -> TdsResult<Option<RowReadResult>> {
Comment on lines +1086 to +1088
if let Some(destination) = writer.bytes_destination(col, length) {
let result = Self::read_known_plp_bytes(reader, destination).await;
writer.finish_bytes_destination(col, result.is_ok());
Comment thread POC_README.md
Comment on lines +16 to +20
| Measure | Before | After |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| Wall clock | 7.45 s | 3.92 s |
| CPU on the reading process | 7.35 s | 2.58 s |
| CPU inside `mssql-tds` | 4.69 s | 0.97 s |
Comment on lines +3516 to +3519
pub async fn next_row_into_unboxed(
&mut self,
writer: &mut (dyn RowWriter + Send),
) -> TdsResult<bool> {
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants