How Redshift Spectrum scans data? - amazon-web-services

Question

Given a data-source of 1.4 TB of Parquet data on S3 partitioned by a timestamp field (so partitions are year - month - day) I am querying a specific day of data (2.6 GB of data) and retrieving all available fields in the Parquet files via Redshift Spectrum with this query:
SELECT *
FROM my_external_schema.my_external_table
WHERE year = '2020' and month = '01' and day = '01'
The table is made available via a Glue Crawler that points at the top level "folder" in S3; this creates a Database and then via this command I link the Database to the new external schema:
create external schema my_external_schema from data catalog
database 'my_external_schema'
iam_role 'arn:aws:iam::123456789:role/my_role'
region 'my-region-9';
Analysing the table in my IDE I can see the table is generated by this statement:
create external table my_external_schema.my_external_table
(
id string,
my_value string,
my_nice_value string
)
partitioned by (year string, month string, day string)
row format serde 'org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.parquet.serde.ParquetHiveSerDe'
with serdeproperties ('serialization.format'='1')
stored as
inputformat 'org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.parquet.MapredParquetInputFormat'
outputformat 'org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.parquet.MapredParquetOutputFormat'
location 's3://my-bucket/my/location/'
table properties ('CrawlerSchemaDeserializerVersion'='1.0', 'CrawlerSchemaSerializerVersion'='1.0', 'UPDATED_BY_CRAWLER'='my_crawler');
When I analyse the query from Redshift I see it was scanned ~86 GB of data instead.
How's that possible? It is a concern because Redshift bills based on the amount of data scanned and looks like the service is scanning around 40 times the actual amount of data is in that partition.
I also tried to execute the same query in Athena and there I get only 2.55 GB of data scanned (definitely more reasonable).
I can't give too many details on the cluster size but assume that those 86GB of scanned data would fit in the cluster's Memory.

Answer 1

The problem seems to be in the AWS Redshift Console.
If we analyse the query from "query details" in Redshift console, I can see that the "Total data scanned" reports 86GB. As Vzarr mentioned, I run the same query on Athena to compare the performance. The execution time was basically the same but the amount of data scanned was completely different: 2.55GB.
I did the same comparison with other queries on S3 external schema, with and without using partitions columns: I saw that the total of GB scanned differs in every test, sometimes differs a lot (320MB in Redshift Spectrum, 20GB in Athena).
I decided to look at the system tables in Redshift in order to understand how the query on the external schema was working. I did a very simple test using SVL_S3QUERY:
SELECT (cast(s3_scanned_bytes as double precision) / 1024 / 1024 / 1024) as gb_scanned,
s3_scanned_rows,
query
FROM SVL_S3QUERY
WHERE query = '<my-query-id>'
The result was completely different from what AWS Redshift Console says for the same query. Not only the gb_scanned was wrong, but s3_scanned_rows was too. The query returns a total of 2.55GB of data Scanned, exactly the same of what Athena said.
To confirm the numbers in the SVL_S3QUERY I used AWS Cost Explorer to double check the total of gb scanned in a day with how much we paid for Redshift Spectrum: the numbers were basically the same.
At this point, I don't know from where or which table the AWS Redshift Console take the query details, but they seem to be completely wrong.