Run boolean and bitwise kernels for longer to reduce benchmark noise

[alamb]

Note to self:

• Apply the same thing to buffer_bit_ops benchmarks

Which issue does this PR close?

We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax.

• Closes #NNN.

Rationale for this change

The boolean and bitwise kernels are currently very noisy and sometimes get nonsensical results (e.g. #8854 (comment)) I think this is because they are so fast. For example, Here is an output from a recent run (note the benchmark each takes only nanoseconds

group         alamb_bitwise_ops                      main
-----         -----------------                      ----
and           1.00    272.4±1.45ns        ? ?/sec    1.00    273.1±1.36ns        ? ?/sec
and_sliced    1.00   1096.0±1.60ns        ? ?/sec    1.00   1095.1±2.77ns        ? ?/sec
not           1.00    213.8±0.29ns        ? ?/sec    1.00    214.0±0.40ns        ? ?/sec
not_sliced    1.00    965.6±9.77ns        ? ?/sec    1.00    961.8±5.75ns        ? ?/sec
or            1.00    254.1±0.66ns        ? ?/sec    1.01    255.6±0.41ns        ? ?/sec
or_sliced     1.00   1225.5±2.12ns        ? ?/sec    1.00   1226.9±7.43ns        ? ?/sec

What changes are included in this PR?

1. Change the array size to 8192 to better match typical sizes used
2. Run each kernel 100 times per criterion iteration to reduce noise

Are these changes tested?

I will benchmark then

Are there any user-facing changes?

No these are benchmarks

[alamb]

We often run these kernels on 8k elements, not 64k elements, so adjust the benchmark to reflect that

[alamb-ghbot]

🤖 ./gh_compare_arrow.sh gh_compare_arrow.sh Running
Linux aal-dev 6.14.0-1018-gcp #19~24.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Sep 24 23:23:09 UTC 2025 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Comparing alamb/benchmarks (471d991) to 08dcc0b diff
BENCH_NAME=bitwise_kernels
BENCH_COMMAND=cargo bench --features=arrow,async,test_common,experimental --bench bitwise_kernels
BENCH_FILTER=
BENCH_BRANCH_NAME=alamb_benchmarks
Results will be posted here when complete

[alamb-ghbot]

🤖 ./gh_compare_arrow.sh gh_compare_arrow.sh Running
Linux aal-dev 6.14.0-1018-gcp #19~24.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Sep 24 23:23:09 UTC 2025 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Comparing alamb/benchmarks (471d991) to 08dcc0b diff
BENCH_NAME=boolean_kernels
BENCH_COMMAND=cargo bench --features=arrow,async,test_common,experimental --bench boolean_kernels
BENCH_FILTER=
BENCH_BRANCH_NAME=alamb_benchmarks
Results will be posted here when complete

[alamb]

run benchmark bitwise_kernel

[alamb-ghbot]

🤖: Benchmark completed

Details

group         alamb_benchmarks                       main
-----         ----------------                       ----
and           32.82     9.0±0.10µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    275.4±3.66ns        ? ?/sec
and_sliced    28.02    34.5±0.34µs        ? ?/sec    1.00  1232.3±23.71ns        ? ?/sec
not           39.97     8.7±0.08µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    216.7±1.65ns        ? ?/sec
not_sliced    30.35    21.3±0.21µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    703.0±7.25ns        ? ?/sec
or            36.19     9.0±0.12µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    248.6±0.90ns        ? ?/sec
or_sliced     28.69    31.4±0.54µs        ? ?/sec    1.00  1093.3±10.24ns        ? ?/sec

[alamb-ghbot]

🤖 ./gh_compare_arrow.sh gh_compare_arrow.sh Running
Linux aal-dev 6.14.0-1018-gcp #19~24.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Sep 24 23:23:09 UTC 2025 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Comparing alamb/benchmarks (471d991) to 08dcc0b diff
BENCH_NAME=bitwise_kernel
BENCH_COMMAND=cargo bench --features=arrow,async,test_common,experimental --bench bitwise_kernel
BENCH_FILTER=
BENCH_BRANCH_NAME=alamb_benchmarks
Results will be posted here when complete

[alamb-ghbot]

🤖: Benchmark completed

Details

group                                                                  alamb_benchmarks                       main
-----                                                                  ----------------                       ----
bench bitwise array scalar: and/bitwise array and, 20% nulls           10.82   185.5±1.07µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     17.1±0.83µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array scalar: and/bitwise array scalar and, no nulls     13.73   225.4±2.66µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.4±0.35µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array scalar: or/bitwise array scalar or, 20% nulls      13.76   229.1±2.50µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.6±0.66µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array scalar: or/bitwise array scalar or, no nulls       11.10   181.4±0.48µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.3±0.38µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array scalar: xor/bitwise array scalar xor, 20% nulls    11.06   185.4±2.32µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.8±0.60µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array scalar: xor/bitwise array scalar xor, no nulls     11.03   181.4±0.55µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.4±0.39µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array: and/bitwise array and, 20% nulls                  9.28    353.9±2.12µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     38.1±4.84µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise array: and/bitwise array and, no nulls                   9.75    374.4±4.04µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     38.4±4.06µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: not/bitwise array not, 20% nulls                        10.17   182.9±1.53µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     18.0±0.54µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: not/bitwise array not, no nulls                         9.55    189.1±1.82µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     19.8±0.46µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: or/bitwise array or, 20% nulls                          9.23    348.0±5.97µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     37.7±4.61µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: or/bitwise array or, no nulls                           10.14   368.8±2.57µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     36.4±4.36µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: xor/bitwise array xor, 20% nulls                        9.40    348.8±3.00µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     37.1±4.52µs        ? ?/sec
bench bitwise: xor/bitwise array xor, no nulls                         9.67    369.0±2.87µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     38.2±5.49µs        ? ?/sec

[alamb]

Roughly speaking this shows what I expect which is the benchmarks taking longer

[alamb]

I am not convinced this is the right approach. I think a better approach would be to run the kernels on multiple different sizes / allocations. I suspect alignment is causing benchmark artifacts