Advance of the Access Methods

The goal of this paper is to outline the advance of the access methods in the last ten years as well as to make review of all available in the accessible bibliography methods

Performance comparison of point and spatial access methods

In the past few years a large number of multidimensional point access methods, also called multiattribute index structures, has been suggested, all of them claiming good performance. Since no performance comparison of these structures under arbitrary (strongly correlated nonuniform, short "ugly") data distributions and under various types of queries has been performed, database researchers and designers were hesitant to use any of these new point access methods. As shown in a recent paper, such point access methods are not only important in traditional database applications. In new applications such as CAD/CIM and geographic or environmental information systems, access methods for spatial objects are needed. As recently shown such access methods are based on point access methods in terms of functionality and performance. Our performance comparison naturally consists of two parts. In part I we w i l l compare multidimensional point access methods, whereas in part I I spatial access methods for rectangles will be compared. In part I we present a survey and classification of existing point access methods. Then we carefully select the following four methods for implementation and performance comparison under seven different data files (distributions) and various types of queries: the 2-level grid file, the BANG file, the hB-tree and a new scheme, called the BUDDY hash tree. We were surprised to see one method to be the clear winner which was the BUDDY hash tree. It exhibits an at least 20 % better average performance than its competitors and is robust under ugly data and queries. In part I I we compare spatial access methods for rectangles. After presenting a survey and classification of existing spatial access methods we carefully selected the following four methods for implementation and performance comparison under six different data files (distributions) and various types of queries: the R-tree, the BANG file, PLOP hashing and the BUDDY hash tree. The result presented two winners: the BANG file and the BUDDY hash tree. This comparison is a first step towards a standardized testbed or benchmark. We offer our data and query files to each designer of a new point or spatial access method such that he can run his implementation in our testbed

A Survey on Spatial Indexing

Spatial information processing has been a centre of attention of research in the previous decade. In spatial databases, data related with spatial coordinates and extents are retrieved based on spatial proximity. A large number of spatial indexes have been proposed to make ease of efficient indexing of spatial objects in large databases and spatial data retrieval. The goal of this paper is to review the advance techniques of the access methods. This paper tries to classify the existing multidimensional access methods, according to the types of indexing, and their performance over spatial queries. K-d trees out performs quad tress without requiring additional memory usage

Incremental elasticity for array databases

Relational databases benefit significantly from elasticity, whereby they execute on a set of changing hardware resources provisioned to match their storage and processing requirements. Such flexibility is especially attractive for scientific databases because their users often have a no-overwrite storage model, in which they delete data only when their available space is exhausted. This results in a database that is regularly growing and expanding its hardware proportionally. Also, scientific databases frequently store their data as multidimensional arrays optimized for spatial querying. This brings about several novel challenges in clustered, skew-aware data placement on an elastic shared-nothing database. In this work, we design and implement elasticity for an array database. We address this challenge on two fronts: determining when to expand a database cluster and how to partition the data within it. In both steps we propose incremental approaches, affecting a minimum set of data and nodes, while maintaining high performance. We introduce an algorithm for gradually augmenting an array database's hardware using a closed-loop control system. After the cluster adds nodes, we optimize data placement for n-dimensional arrays. Many of our elastic partitioners incrementally reorganize an array, redistributing data only to new nodes. By combining these two tools, the scientific database efficiently and seamlessly manages its monotonically increasing hardware resources.Intel Corporation (Science and Technology Center for Big Data