Papers › GPTuner: A Manual-Reading Database Tuning System via GPT-Guided Bayesian Optimization
GPTuner: A Manual-Reading Database Tuning System via GPT-Guided Bayesian Optimization
Jiale Lao, Yibo Wang, Yufei Li, Jianping Wang, Yunjia Zhang, Zhiyuan Cheng, Wanghu Chen, Mingjie Tang, Jianguo Wang
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Modern database management systems (DBMS) expose hundreds of configurable knobs to control system behaviours. Determining the appropriate values for these knobs to improve DBMS performance is a long-standing problem in the database community. As there is an increasing number of knobs to tune and each knob could be in continuous or categorical values, manual tuning becomes impractical. Recently, automatic tuning systems using machine learning methods have shown great potentials. However, existing approaches still incur significant tuning costs or only yield sub-optimal performance. This is because they either ignore the extensive domain knowledge available (e.g., DBMS manuals and forum discussions) and only rely on the runtime feedback of benchmark evaluations to guide the optimization, or they utilize the domain knowledge in a limited way. Hence, we propose GPTuner, a manual-reading database tuning system. Firstly, we develop a Large Language Model (LLM)-based pipeline to collect and refine heterogeneous knowledge, and propose a prompt ensemble algorithm to unify a structured view of the refined knowledge. Secondly, using the structured knowledge, we (1) design a workload-aware and training-free knob selection strategy, (2) develop a search space optimization technique considering the value range of each knob, and (3) propose a Coarse-to-Fine Bayesian Optimization Framework to explore the optimized space. Finally, we evaluate GPTuner under different benchmarks (TPC-C and TPC-H), metrics (throughput and latency) as well as DBMS (PostgreSQL and MySQL). Compared to the state-of-the-art approaches, GPTuner identifies better configurations in 16x less time on average. Moreover, GPTuner achieves up to 30% performance improvement (higher throughput or lower latency) over the best-performing alternative.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2311.03157")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 1 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
1 sample harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 1 of the 1 sample is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from solidlao/gptuner. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
811c31b57a4e22be · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections