MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2574861468 · doi:10.14778/3025111.3025123

Skipping-oriented partitioning for columnar layouts

2016· article· en· W2574861468 on OpenAlexaff
Liwen Sun, Michael J. Franklin, Jiannan Wang, Eugene Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)WorkloadColumn (typography)Big dataAnalyticsDatabaseData accessDistributed computingTupleData scienceData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As data volumes continue to grow, modern database systems increasingly rely on data skipping mechanisms to improve performance by avoiding access to irrelevant data. Recent work [39] proposed a fine-grained partitioning scheme that was shown to improve the opportunities for data skipping in row-oriented systems. Modern analytics and big data systems increasingly adopt columnar storage schemes, and in such systems, a row-based approach misses important opportunities for further improving data skipping. The flexibility of column-oriented organizations, however, comes with the additional cost of tuple reconstruction. In this paper, we develop Generalized Skipping-Oriented Partitioning (GSOP), a novel hybrid data skipping framework that takes into account these row-based and column-based tradeoffs. In contrast to previous column-oriented physical design work, GSOP considers the tradeoffs between horizontal data skipping and vertical partitioning jointly. Our experiments using two public benchmarks and a real-world workload show that GSOP can significantly reduce the amount of data scanned and improve end-to-end query response times over the state-of-the- art techniques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207