Showing posts with label column oriented database. Show all posts
Showing posts with label column oriented database. Show all posts

Friday, January 11, 2008

RDF in a...database?

This is has many similiarities in a recent conversion about the relational model and RDF, comes "Relational databases for storing and querying RDF":
Our work in this area, "Scalable Semantic Web Data Management Using Vertical Partitioning," appeared in the VLDB Conference in Vienna in September. It showed that using a column-oriented database, along with this property representation, allows us to overcome the overhead of representing NULLs, while providing two orders of magnitude better performance than the naive triples representation. This is particularly true when processing queries that must access many triples during execution (e.g., computing the number of books grouped by subject area or institution.) Of course, there is a fair amount of subtlety to getting good performance out of such a representation. Have a look at our conference paper for the details!


This paper and others was mentioned previously. This view, of property tables in column databases, is very similar to untyped relations.

Friday, September 07, 2007

Column Databases Reach Slashdot

In a typically incorrect charactization of the issue Slashdot is covering column databases: Relational database pioneer says technology is obsolete via Are Relational Databases Obsolete?. A better way to explain it, is that column databases are designed to get around the current problems with modern computer architectures such as latency in memory and hard disks as well as achieving better CPU utilization (typically databases have very little parallelism).

While it's early days yet, column databases storing something like RDF may get faster than row-oriented SQL databases. I posted about column databases storing RDF previously.

"Vertica beats all row stores on the planet -- typically by a factor of 50," he wrote. "The only engines that come closer are other column stores, which Vertica typically beats by around a factor of 10."

And from the cited blog:
In addition, it provides built-in features appropriate to the needs of 2007 customers. These include:

o Linear scalability over a shared-nothing hardware grid
o Automatic high availability
o Automatic use of materialized views
o "No knobs" -- minimum DBA requirements

Seeing as though I've just been looking into this here are a few references:
Update: InfoQ and artima have also picked up on the story.
Update 2: While I'm normally pretty skeptical about most things, column databases have had their own fair share of problems in the past.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Everything You Know is Wrong