Are current benchmarks adequate to evaluate distributed transactional databases?

Luyi Qu , Qingshuai Wang , Ting Chen , Keqiang Li , Rong Zhang , Xuan Zhou , Quanqing Xu , Zhifeng Yang , Chuanhui Yang , Weining Qian , Aoying Zhou
{"title":"Are current benchmarks adequate to evaluate distributed transactional databases?","authors":"Luyi Qu ,&nbsp;Qingshuai Wang ,&nbsp;Ting Chen ,&nbsp;Keqiang Li ,&nbsp;Rong Zhang ,&nbsp;Xuan Zhou ,&nbsp;Quanqing Xu ,&nbsp;Zhifeng Yang ,&nbsp;Chuanhui Yang ,&nbsp;Weining Qian ,&nbsp;Aoying Zhou","doi":"10.1016/j.tbench.2022.100031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>With the rapid development of distributed transactional databases in recent years, there is an urgent need for fair performance evaluation and comparison. Though there are various open-source benchmarks built for databases, it is lack of a comprehensive study about the applicability for distributed transactional databases. This paper presents a review of the state-of-art benchmarks with respect to distributed transactional databases. We first summarize the representative architectures of distributed transactional databases and then provide an overview about the chock points in distributed transactional databases. Then, we classify the classic transactional benchmarks based on their characteristics and design purposes. Finally, we review these benchmarks from schema and data definition, workload generation, and evaluation and metrics to check whether they are still applicable to distributed transactional databases with respect to the chock points. This paper exposes a potential research direction to motivate future benchmark designs in the area of distributed transactional databases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100155,"journal":{"name":"BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations","volume":"2 1","pages":"Article 100031"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772485922000187/pdfft?md5=f4298cd3b83df8248ba96df30a0f7411&pid=1-s2.0-S2772485922000187-main.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772485922000187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

With the rapid development of distributed transactional databases in recent years, there is an urgent need for fair performance evaluation and comparison. Though there are various open-source benchmarks built for databases, it is lack of a comprehensive study about the applicability for distributed transactional databases. This paper presents a review of the state-of-art benchmarks with respect to distributed transactional databases. We first summarize the representative architectures of distributed transactional databases and then provide an overview about the chock points in distributed transactional databases. Then, we classify the classic transactional benchmarks based on their characteristics and design purposes. Finally, we review these benchmarks from schema and data definition, workload generation, and evaluation and metrics to check whether they are still applicable to distributed transactional databases with respect to the chock points. This paper exposes a potential research direction to motivate future benchmark designs in the area of distributed transactional databases.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当前的基准测试是否足以评估分布式事务数据库?
随着近年来分布式事务数据库的快速发展,人们迫切需要对分布式事务数据库进行公平的性能评估和比较。虽然有各种各样的开源数据库基准,但缺乏对分布式事务数据库适用性的全面研究。本文介绍了关于分布式事务数据库的最新基准测试。我们首先总结了分布式事务数据库的代表性体系结构,然后概述了分布式事务数据库中的阻塞点。然后,我们根据它们的特征和设计目的对经典事务性基准进行分类。最后,我们从模式和数据定义、工作负载生成、评估和度量等方面回顾这些基准,以检查它们是否仍然适用于分布式事务数据库中的阻塞点。本文揭示了一个潜在的研究方向,以激励分布式事务数据库领域未来的基准设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of mechanical properties of natural fiber based polymer composite Could bibliometrics reveal top science and technology achievements and researchers? The case for evaluatology-based science and technology evaluation Table of Contents BinCodex: A comprehensive and multi-level dataset for evaluating binary code similarity detection techniques Analyzing the impact of opportunistic maintenance optimization on manufacturing industries in Bangladesh: An empirical study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1