PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 20, 2026Journal of Computer Technology and Applied Mathematics0 citationsOpen Access

Benchmarking Learned Cardinality Estimation Techniques for Analytical Query Processing in Data Warehouses

View Full Paper
JHJiacheng HuXWXM. WangJLJiawen Lai

Key Points

  • This paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness of learned cardinality estimation methods on various data warehouse schemas.
  • Empirical evaluation of seven cardinality estimation methods including query-driven, data-driven, and hybrid approaches.
  • Benchmarking against PostgreSQL histogram-based estimator across three datasets: TPC-DS, STATS-CEB, and IMDB/JOB.
  • Measurement of estimation accuracy using Q-Error, inference latency, training cost, and end-to-end query execution time.
  • Hybrid methods, particularly FactorJoin, achieved the strongest accuracy with a median Q-Error of 1.74 on TPC-DS.
  • Data-driven methods FLAT and BayesCard achieved a favorable balance between accuracy and inference speed.
  • BayesCard and FactorJoin maintained high resilience, with a median Q-Error increase of fewer than 1.5 points after a 50% data insertion.

Abstract

Cardinality estimation remains one of the most critical yet error-prone components of query optimization in modern data warehouses. Recent advances in machine learning have produced a diverse family of learned cardinality estimators that demonstrate substantial accuracy improvements on standard benchmarks. Yet existing evaluations predominantly rely on third-normal-form schemas, leaving their effectiveness on star and snowflake schemas—the backbone of analytical data warehousing—largely unexplored. This paper presents a systematic empirical evaluation of seven representative learned cardinality estimation methods spanning three paradigmatic categories: query-driven, data-driven, and hybrid approaches. All methods are benchmarked against the PostgreSQL histogram-based estimator on three complementary datasets: TPC-DS with its native snowflake schema, STATS-CEB with real-world relational data, and IMDB/JOB as the established cross-study reference. The evaluation encompasses estimation accuracy measured by Q-Error and P-Error, inference latency, training cost, model compactness, end-to-end query execution time, and robustness under simulated ETL batch insertions. Results indicate that hybrid methods, particularly FactorJoin, achieve the strongest accuracy on data warehouse workloads with a median Q-Error of 1.74 on TPC-DS, while data-driven methods such as FLAT and BayesCard offer a favorable balance between accuracy and inference speed. BayesCard and FactorJoin exhibit the highest resilience to data updates, with median Q-Error increasing by fewer than 1.5 points after a 50% data insertion. These findings provide actionable guidance for practitioners seeking to deploy learned cardinality estimation in production data warehouse environments.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0d4f4cf03e14405aa9a935https://doi.org/10.70393/6a6374616d.343134
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Advances and Challenges in Machine Learning-Based Cardinality Estimation for Database Query Optimization2025
  2. 2Is it Bigger than a Breadbox: Efficient Cardinality Estimation for Real World Workloads2025
  3. 3The Accuracy of Cardinality Estimators: Unraveling the Evaluation Result Conundrum2025 · 2 citations
  4. 4ByteCard: Enhancing ByteDance's Data Warehouse with Learned Cardinality Estimation2024
  5. 5CardBench: A Benchmark for Learned Cardinality Estimation in Relational Databases2024 · 1 citations