Benchmarking two types of restricted transitive closure algorithms

Anestis A. Toptsis, Clement T. Yu, P. Nelson
{"title":"Benchmarking two types of restricted transitive closure algorithms","authors":"Anestis A. Toptsis, Clement T. Yu, P. Nelson","doi":"10.1109/CMPSAC.1990.139387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The authors present and evaluate two algorithms-one linear and one logarithmic-for the computation of the restricted transitive closure of a binary database relation. The algorithms are implemented in a relational database management system (Ingres), and on equipment which is fairly common in today's database application environments. The performance evaluation reveals three important points. First, unlike the case of the complete transitive closure computations where the linear (seminaive) method is outperformed by the logarithmic methods, in the computation of the restricted transitive closure the opposite is true. Second, contrary to the popular belief that the algorithms run faster if the size of the intermediate result relations is decreased by deleting excess data, the fastest algorithms are those which attempt to delete no data. Unless deletions can be handled efficiently, their potential benefits are overshadowed by the cost incurred to perform them. Third, the operations union and difference are established as being significantly more expensive than the join operation in these algorithms.<<ETX>>","PeriodicalId":127509,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings., Fourteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings., Fourteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CMPSAC.1990.139387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The authors present and evaluate two algorithms-one linear and one logarithmic-for the computation of the restricted transitive closure of a binary database relation. The algorithms are implemented in a relational database management system (Ingres), and on equipment which is fairly common in today's database application environments. The performance evaluation reveals three important points. First, unlike the case of the complete transitive closure computations where the linear (seminaive) method is outperformed by the logarithmic methods, in the computation of the restricted transitive closure the opposite is true. Second, contrary to the popular belief that the algorithms run faster if the size of the intermediate result relations is decreased by deleting excess data, the fastest algorithms are those which attempt to delete no data. Unless deletions can be handled efficiently, their potential benefits are overshadowed by the cost incurred to perform them. Third, the operations union and difference are established as being significantly more expensive than the join operation in these algorithms.<>
对两种受限传递闭包算法进行基准测试
本文给出并评价了计算二元数据库关系的受限传递闭包的两种算法——一种线性算法和一种对数算法。这些算法在关系数据库管理系统(Ingres)中实现,并且在当今数据库应用程序环境中相当常见的设备上实现。绩效评估揭示了三个要点。首先,与完全传递闭包计算中线性(语义)方法优于对数方法的情况不同,在受限传递闭包的计算中,情况正好相反。其次,如果通过删除多余的数据来减少中间结果关系的大小,那么算法就会运行得更快,这与流行的观点相反,最快的算法是那些试图不删除数据的算法。除非删除可以有效地处理,否则它们的潜在好处会被执行它们所产生的成本所掩盖。第三,在这些算法中,联合操作和差分操作的开销明显高于连接操作
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信