MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193493045 · doi:10.14778/3510397.3510400

Making RDBMSs efficient on graph workloads through predefined joins

2022· article· en· W3193493045 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoinsComputer scienceRelational database management systemHash functionTupleGraphTheoretical computer scienceDatabaseRelational databaseParallel computingData miningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joins in native graph database management systems (GDBMSs) are predefined to the system as edges, which are indexed in adjacency list indices and serve as pointers. This contrasts with and can be more performant than value-based joins in RDBMSs. Existing approaches to integrate predefined joins into RDBMSs adopt a strict separation of graph and relational data and processors, where a graph-specific processor uses left-deep and index nested loop joins (INLJ) for a subset of joins. In this paper we study and experimentally evaluate this technique's performance against an alternative technique that is based on using hash joins that use system-level row IDs (RIDs). In this alternative approach, when a join between two tables is predefined to the system, the RIDs of joining tuples are materialized in extended tables and optionally in RID indices. Instead of using the RID index to perform the join directly, we use it primarily in hash joins to generate filters that can be passed to scans using sideways information passing (sip), ensuring sequential scans. We further compare these two approaches against: (i) the default value-based joins of an RDBMS; and (ii) using materialized views that can avoid evaluating predefined joins completely and instead replace them with scans. We integrated our alternative approach to DuckDB and call the resulting system GRainDB. Our evaluation demonstrates that existing INJL-based approach can be very efficient when entity relations contain very selective filters. However, GRainDB's approach is more robust and is either competitive with or outperforms the INLJ-based approach across a wide range of settings. We further demonstrate that GRainDB far improves the performance of DuckDB, which uses default value-based joins, on relational and graph workloads with large many-to-many joins, making it competitive with a state-of-the-art GDBMS, and incurs no major overheads otherwise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.226 · 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