Perf: fast CursorValues compare for StringViewArray using inline_key_… #16630

zhuqi-lucas · 2025-06-30T15:22:32Z

…fast

Which issue does this PR close?

The arrow-rs compare improvement has been merged, we can apply it to CursorValues compare for StringViewArray in datafusion.

Related arrow-rs changes:
apache/arrow-rs#7748

Closes #16629

Rationale for this change

What changes are included in this PR?

Optimizing the CursorValues compare for StringViewArray using fast inlined fast key, and compare performance.

Are these changes tested?

Yes

--------------------
Benchmark sort_tpch.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃      main ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃        Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Q1           │ 108.19 ms │                       106.83 ms │     no change │
│ Q2           │ 101.67 ms │                       102.40 ms │     no change │
│ Q3           │ 665.25 ms │                       657.33 ms │     no change │
│ Q4           │ 129.60 ms │                       128.60 ms │     no change │
│ Q5           │ 260.81 ms │                       259.19 ms │     no change │
│ Q6           │ 277.54 ms │                       276.67 ms │     no change │
│ Q7           │ 457.42 ms │                       445.38 ms │     no change │
│ Q8           │ 306.32 ms │                       304.63 ms │     no change │
│ Q9           │ 319.58 ms │                       315.52 ms │     no change │
│ Q10          │ 466.82 ms │                       469.02 ms │     no change │
│ Q11          │ 253.35 ms │                       205.67 ms │ +1.23x faster │
└──────────────┴───────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃           ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (main)                              │ 3346.55ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 3271.23ms │
│ Average Time (main)                            │  304.23ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │  297.38ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │         1 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │         0 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │        10 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │         0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

Are there any user-facing changes?

No

…fast

…ned_fast_key

zhuqi-lucas · 2025-07-01T07:36:48Z

datafusion/physical-plan/src/sorts/merge.rs

@@ -493,13 +493,12 @@ impl<C: CursorValues> SortPreservingMergeStream<C> {
            if self.enable_round_robin_tie_breaker && cmp_node == 1 {
                match (&self.cursors[winner], &self.cursors[challenger]) {
                    (Some(ac), Some(bc)) => {
-                        let ord = ac.cmp(bc);
-                        if ord.is_eq() {
+                        if ac == bc {


I also change this to using eq instead of compare first, this should also optimize some cases.

zhuqi-lucas · 2025-07-01T08:09:01Z

The latest PR shows almost 1.4 fast in my local MAC.

alamb · 2025-07-01T20:54:04Z

🤖 ./gh_compare_branch.sh Benchmark Script Running
Linux aal-dev 6.11.0-1016-gcp #16~24.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed May 28 02:40:52 UTC 2025 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Comparing fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key (82ab9df) to 9bb309c diff using: tpch_mem clickbench_partitioned clickbench_extended
Results will be posted here when complete

alamb

Thanks @zhuqi-lucas -- this looks wonderful

I kicked off some benchmark runs. I think we'll be ready to merge once the benchmarks are done and we add some tests.

Thank you again for pushing this along. BTW I have been using your work as a case study in how to do performance optimization https://x.com/andrewlamb1111/status/1940145869833085246 ❤️

alamb · 2025-06-30T18:54:08Z

datafusion/physical-plan/src/sorts/cursor.rs

@@ -288,6 +288,64 @@ impl CursorArray for StringViewArray {
    }
 }

+/// Todo use arrow-rs side api after: <https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/7748> released


alamb · 2025-07-01T20:56:03Z

datafusion/physical-plan/src/sorts/cursor.rs

+/// ⇒ key("bar") < key("bar\0")
+/// ```
+#[inline(always)]
+pub fn inline_key_fast(raw: u128) -> u128 {


While I know this is only temporary until we use the code in apache/arrow-rs#7748 , I think we should add some unit tests to make sure we don't accidentally break it

Perhaps we can just copy/paste the test_inline_key_fast_various_lengths_and_lexical test from https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/7748/files#diff-160ecd8082d5d28081f01cdb08a898cb8f49b17149c7118bf96746ddaae24b4fR1168 ?

Thank you @alamb for good point, addressed in latest PR!

Do we need to port the same fix from

fix: Incorrect inlined string view comparison after Add prefix compar… arrow-rs#7875
?

Thank you @alamb,

I will port the apache/arrow-rs#7875 fix, after it merged!

alamb · 2025-07-01T21:36:11Z

🤖: Benchmark completed

Details

Comparing HEAD and fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key
--------------------
Benchmark clickbench_extended.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃        HEAD ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃    Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ QQuery 0     │  1959.45 ms │                      1874.85 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 1     │   716.85 ms │                       682.99 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 2     │  1379.59 ms │                      1358.63 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 3     │   669.13 ms │                       662.60 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 4     │  1384.88 ms │                      1359.05 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 5     │ 15154.52 ms │                     15103.16 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 6     │  2053.03 ms │                      2065.88 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 7     │  1944.19 ms │                      1907.83 ms │ no change │
└──────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃            ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (HEAD)                              │ 25261.64ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 25014.99ms │
│ Average Time (HEAD)                            │  3157.70ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │  3126.87ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │          0 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │          0 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │          8 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │          0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴────────────┘
--------------------
Benchmark clickbench_partitioned.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃        HEAD ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃        Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ QQuery 0     │     2.22 ms │                         2.26 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 1     │    33.74 ms │                        33.58 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 2     │    81.83 ms │                        81.25 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 3     │    99.56 ms │                        98.29 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 4     │   595.65 ms │                       591.31 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 5     │   857.94 ms │                       862.35 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 6     │     2.20 ms │                         2.22 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 7     │    38.99 ms │                        39.03 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 8     │   870.83 ms │                       865.10 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 9     │  1191.06 ms │                      1189.45 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 10    │   264.17 ms │                       257.69 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 11    │   295.33 ms │                       283.15 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 12    │   866.71 ms │                       882.61 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 13    │  1251.38 ms │                      1157.31 ms │ +1.08x faster │
│ QQuery 14    │   806.11 ms │                       815.12 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 15    │   789.04 ms │                       773.35 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 16    │  1588.58 ms │                      1619.14 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 17    │  1597.89 ms │                      1611.10 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 18    │  2850.79 ms │                      2893.84 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 19    │    86.69 ms │                        87.67 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 20    │  1151.87 ms │                      1184.58 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 21    │  1302.52 ms │                      1340.23 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 22    │  2128.11 ms │                      2212.12 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 23    │  7475.95 ms │                      7440.17 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 24    │   446.12 ms │                       438.83 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 25    │   300.09 ms │                       311.06 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 26    │   444.03 ms │                       456.63 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 27    │  1537.19 ms │                      1565.20 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 28    │ 12926.19 ms │                     11838.29 ms │ +1.09x faster │
│ QQuery 29    │   539.78 ms │                       531.80 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 30    │   777.35 ms │                       796.65 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 31    │   810.08 ms │                       816.43 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 32    │  2410.45 ms │                      2424.99 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 33    │  3161.23 ms │                      3192.31 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 34    │  3257.99 ms │                      3264.91 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 35    │  1277.55 ms │                      1269.33 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 36    │   123.77 ms │                       123.61 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 37    │    51.71 ms │                        51.52 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 38    │   118.14 ms │                       122.98 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 39    │   196.57 ms │                       198.79 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 40    │    40.52 ms │                        41.97 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 41    │    38.77 ms │                        37.49 ms │     no change │
│ QQuery 42    │    32.74 ms │                        32.90 ms │     no change │
└──────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃            ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (HEAD)                              │ 54719.47ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 53838.60ms │
│ Average Time (HEAD)                            │  1272.55ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │  1252.06ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │          2 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │          0 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │         41 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │          0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴────────────┘
--------------------
Benchmark tpch_mem_sf1.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃      HEAD ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃    Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ QQuery 1     │ 102.19 ms │                       101.42 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 2     │  20.99 ms │                        21.17 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 3     │  32.26 ms │                        32.88 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 4     │  18.62 ms │                        18.60 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 5     │  49.97 ms │                        48.76 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 6     │  11.80 ms │                        11.95 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 7     │  90.10 ms │                        90.28 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 8     │  25.44 ms │                        25.14 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 9     │  54.88 ms │                        54.05 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 10    │  42.71 ms │                        43.23 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 11    │  11.43 ms │                        11.46 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 12    │  34.32 ms │                        34.39 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 13    │  26.03 ms │                        26.22 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 14    │   9.79 ms │                         9.82 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 15    │  19.53 ms │                        19.32 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 16    │  18.03 ms │                        18.51 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 17    │  94.72 ms │                        96.35 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 18    │ 195.27 ms │                       193.54 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 19    │  24.74 ms │                        24.71 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 20    │  32.22 ms │                        31.67 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 21    │ 144.80 ms │                       144.06 ms │ no change │
│ QQuery 22    │  14.50 ms │                        14.74 ms │ no change │
└──────────────┴───────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃           ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (HEAD)                              │ 1074.36ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 1072.26ms │
│ Average Time (HEAD)                            │   48.83ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │   48.74ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │         0 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │         0 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │        22 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │         0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

alamb · 2025-07-01T21:36:14Z

🤖 ./gh_compare_branch.sh Benchmark Script Running
Linux aal-dev 6.11.0-1016-gcp #16~24.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed May 28 02:40:52 UTC 2025 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Comparing fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key (82ab9df) to 9bb309c diff using: sort_tpch
Results will be posted here when complete

alamb · 2025-07-01T21:37:25Z

🤖: Benchmark completed

Details

Comparing HEAD and fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key
--------------------
Benchmark sort_tpch.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃       HEAD ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃        Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Q1           │  325.73 ms │                       343.28 ms │  1.05x slower │
│ Q2           │  323.40 ms │                       296.73 ms │ +1.09x faster │
│ Q3           │ 1094.10 ms │                      1061.63 ms │     no change │
│ Q4           │  413.50 ms │                       422.10 ms │     no change │
│ Q5           │  396.88 ms │                       403.57 ms │     no change │
│ Q6           │  433.31 ms │                       437.50 ms │     no change │
│ Q7           │  792.53 ms │                       791.69 ms │     no change │
│ Q8           │  665.29 ms │                       684.66 ms │     no change │
│ Q9           │  700.98 ms │                       727.78 ms │     no change │
│ Q10          │ 1027.52 ms │                      1042.44 ms │     no change │
│ Q11          │  579.11 ms │                       549.83 ms │ +1.05x faster │
└──────────────┴────────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃           ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (HEAD)                              │ 6752.35ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 6761.22ms │
│ Average Time (HEAD)                            │  613.85ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │  614.66ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │         2 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │         1 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │         8 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │         0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

…cas/arrow-datafusion into fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key

zhuqi-lucas · 2025-07-02T06:59:10Z

Thanks @zhuqi-lucas -- this looks wonderful

I kicked off some benchmark runs. I think we'll be ready to merge once the benchmarks are done and we add some tests.

Thank you again for pushing this along. BTW I have been using your work as a case study in how to do performance optimization https://x.com/andrewlamb1111/status/1940145869833085246 ❤️

Thank you very much @alamb! I really appreciate your kind words and support.

I’ve also shared this work on my LinkedIn, it's been a fantastic experience joining the Apache DataFusion / Arrow Rust community and contributing to performance improvements.

Looking forward to doing more!

zhuqi-lucas · 2025-07-02T07:29:01Z

🤖: Benchmark completed

Details

Comparing HEAD and fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key
--------------------
Benchmark sort_tpch.json
--------------------
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Query        ┃       HEAD ┃ fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key ┃        Change ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Q1           │  325.73 ms │                       343.28 ms │  1.05x slower │
│ Q2           │  323.40 ms │                       296.73 ms │ +1.09x faster │
│ Q3           │ 1094.10 ms │                      1061.63 ms │     no change │
│ Q4           │  413.50 ms │                       422.10 ms │     no change │
│ Q5           │  396.88 ms │                       403.57 ms │     no change │
│ Q6           │  433.31 ms │                       437.50 ms │     no change │
│ Q7           │  792.53 ms │                       791.69 ms │     no change │
│ Q8           │  665.29 ms │                       684.66 ms │     no change │
│ Q9           │  700.98 ms │                       727.78 ms │     no change │
│ Q10          │ 1027.52 ms │                      1042.44 ms │     no change │
│ Q11          │  579.11 ms │                       549.83 ms │ +1.05x faster │
└──────────────┴────────────┴─────────────────────────────────┴───────────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ Benchmark Summary                              ┃           ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ Total Time (HEAD)                              │ 6752.35ms │
│ Total Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key)   │ 6761.22ms │
│ Average Time (HEAD)                            │  613.85ms │
│ Average Time (fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key) │  614.66ms │
│ Queries Faster                                 │         2 │
│ Queries Slower                                 │         1 │
│ Queries with No Change                         │         8 │
│ Queries with Failure                           │         0 │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

The Q1 regression seems noise, because it does not have utf8view sort key, the l_linenumber is Integer:

        SELECT l_linenumber, l_partkey
        FROM lineitem
        ORDER BY l_linenumber

alamb

Thank you @zhuqi-lucas

Perf: fast CursorValues compare for StringViewArray using inline_key_…

2701e61

…fast

github-actions bot added the physical-plan Changes to the physical-plan crate label Jun 30, 2025

zhuqi-lucas added 2 commits June 30, 2025 23:43

fix

e9cf5f9

polish

95b8d73

zhuqi-lucas force-pushed the fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key branch from 2551c37 to 95b8d73 Compare July 1, 2025 06:50

zhuqi-lucas added 2 commits July 1, 2025 14:51

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into fast_sort_with_inli…

cec1889

…ned_fast_key

polish

993e56d

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key

d6650a7

Merge branch 'main' into fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key

82ab9df

alamb reviewed Jul 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

zhuqi-lucas added 2 commits July 2, 2025 14:46

add test

aa22fae

Merge branch 'fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key' of github.com:zhuqi-lu…

b7c7cd3

…cas/arrow-datafusion into fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key

Merge branch 'main' into fast_sort_with_inlined_fast_key

8b7e3d6

alamb approved these changes Jul 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

alamb merged commit 0185da6 into apache:main Jul 4, 2025
27 checks passed

zhuqi-lucas mentioned this pull request Jul 8, 2025

DRAFT: Update arrow/parquet to 56.0.0 #16690

Draft

Perf: fast CursorValues compare for StringViewArray using inline_key_… #16630

Perf: fast CursorValues compare for StringViewArray using inline_key_… #16630

Uh oh!

Conversation

zhuqi-lucas commented Jun 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Which issue does this PR close?

Rationale for this change

What changes are included in this PR?

Are these changes tested?

Are there any user-facing changes?

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas Jul 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

alamb commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

alamb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb Jun 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb Jul 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas Jul 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb Jul 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas Jul 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

alamb commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

alamb commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

alamb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

zhuqi-lucas commented Jun 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

zhuqi-lucas commented Jul 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading