mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Low Rank Learning for Offline Query Optimization

arXiv 2504.06399 ↗First posted 8 Apr 2025cs.DB cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent deployments of learned query optimizers use expensive neural networks and ad-hoc search policies. To address these issues, we introduce textscLimeQO, a framework for offline query optimization leveraging low-rank learning to efficiently explore alternative query plans with minimal resource usage. By modeling the workload as a partially observed, low-rank matrix, we predict unobserved query plan latencies using purely linear methods, significantly reducing computational overhead compared to neural networks. We formalize offline exploration as an active learning problem, and present simple heuristics that reduces a 3-hour workload to 1.5 hours after just 1.5 hours of exploration. Additionally, we propose a transductive Tree Convolutional Neural Network (TCNN) that, despite higher computational costs, achieves the same workload reduction with only 0.5 hours of exploration. Unlike previous approaches that place expensive neural networks directly in the query processing ``hot'' path, our approach offers a low-overhead solution and a no-regressions guarantee, all without making assumptions about the underlying DBMS. The code is available in hrefhttps://github.com/zixy17/LimeQOhttps://github.com/zixy17/LimeQO.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 91 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2025.

Builds on

29 of 91 references.

References · 29

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  2. 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,111
  3. 2017DeepFM: A Factorization-Machine based Neural Network for CTR Predictioncited by 676
  4. 2020A Survey of Deep Active Learningcited by 554
  5. 2019Deep Learning Recommendation Model for Personalization and Recommendation Systemscited by 327
  6. 2017Deep Learning based Recommender System: A Survey and New Perspectivescited by 136
  7. 2017Machine Learning for Survival Analysis: A Surveycited by 112
  8. 2014Matrix Completion and Low-Rank SVD via Fast Alternating Least Squarescited by 104
  9. 2019Neo: A Learned Query Optimizercited by 80
  10. 2018Learned Cardinalities: Estimating Correlated Joins with Deep Learningcited by 64
  11. 2020Bao: Learning to Steer Query Optimizerscited by 62
  12. 2019Deep Unsupervised Cardinality Estimationcited by 36
17 more
  1. 2018Learning to Optimize Join Queries With Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 32
  2. 2023Lero: A Learning-to-Rank Query Optimizercited by 26
  3. 2018Apache Calcite: A Foundational Framework for Optimized Query Processing Over Heterogeneous Data Sourcescited by 25
  4. 2018Deep Reinforcement Learning for Join Order Enumerationcited by 25
  5. 2021Flow-Loss: Learning Cardinality Estimates That Mattercited by 22
  6. 2022Balsa: Learning a Query Optimizer Without Expert Demonstrationscited by 18
  7. 2022Zero-Shot Cost Models for Out-of-the-box Learned Cost Predictioncited by 16
  8. 2018Learning State Representations for Query Optimization with Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 14
  9. 2023ALECE: An Attention-based Learned Cardinality Estimator for SPJ Queries on Dynamic Workloads (Extended)cited by 13
  10. 2013Building Bridges: Viewing Active Learning from the Multi-Armed Bandit Lenscited by 6
  11. 2017Matrix completion with queriescited by 5
  12. 2025Learned Offline Query Planning via Bayesian Optimizationcited by 4
  13. 2023Is Your Learned Query Optimizer Behaving As You Expect? A Machine Learning Perspectivecited by 3
  14. 2024Stage: Query Execution Time Prediction in Amazon Redshiftcited by 3
  15. 2019Guided Automated Learning for query workload re-Optimizationcited by 2
  16. 2022Deploying a Steered Query Optimizer in Production at Microsoftcited by 2
  17. 2024Grid-AR: A Grid-based Booster for Learned Cardinality Estimation and Range Joinscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.