Skip to content

feat(expr): add timestamp timezone replacement - #10182

Merged
robert3005 merged 7 commits into
developfrom
dk/replace-time-zone
Oct 9, 2026
Merged

robert3005 merged 7 commits into
developfrom
dk/replace-time-zone

perf(expr): build replace_time_zone output buffers directly

92ddab2
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
CodSpeed / CodSpeed Performance Analysis failed Oct 9, 2026 in 0s

Performance Regression: -5.73%

⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected

Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.

For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.

⚡ 3 improved benchmarks
❌ 7 regressed benchmarks
✅ 2165 untouched benchmarks
🆕 2 new benchmarks
⏩ 434 skipped benchmarks1

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
❌ WallTime mul_u64_nonnull_neon 28.5 µs 39.6 µs -27.91%
❌ WallTime multiply_shapes_neon[(32768, PerRowPerRow)] 32.3 µs 38.8 µs -16.86%
❌ WallTime mul_i64_nonnull_neon 32.6 µs 38.7 µs -15.86%
❌ Simulation sum_i64 193.9 µs 224.9 µs -13.76%
❌ Simulation sum_v2_i64 193.8 µs 224.4 µs -13.61%
❌ WallTime scalar_subtract_neon 10.8 µs 12.4 µs -13.16%
❌ WallTime bitpack_blocked_compress_avx2 6.8 µs 7.6 µs -11.13%
⚡ Simulation decode_primitives[i64, (1000, 32)] 37.7 µs 24.5 µs +53.82%
⚡ WallTime compare_u64_avx2 3.8 µs 3.4 µs +11.69%
⚡ Simulation or_true_constant 20.3 µs 18.2 µs +11.31%
🆕 Simulation varbinview_fill_null_inlined N/A 276.8 µs N/A
🆕 Simulation varbinview_fill_null_outlined N/A 289.1 µs N/A

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.


Comparing dk/replace-time-zone (92ddab2) with develop (53c7659)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 434 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

  2. No successful run was found on develop (30e84dc) during the generation of this report, so 53c7659 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩