MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scalable Big Spatial Data Processing with SQL Query Compilation and Distributed Morsel-driven Parallelism

2024· article· en· W4406460507 on OpenAlexaff
Rahul Sahni, Xiaozheng Zhang, Sudip Chatterjee, Suprio Ray

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilitySQLParallel computingParallelism (grammar)Spatial queryQuery by ExampleQuery optimizationSargableBig dataQuery languageDatabaseProgramming languageWeb search queryInformation retrievalOperating systemSearch engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid rise in spatial data volumes from diverse sources necessitate efficient spatial data processing capability. Although most relational databases support spatial extensions of SQL query features, they offer limited scalability. Traditional relational database query processing follows a pull-based (or tuple-at-a-time) model of query processing. This is not efficient for processing large volumes of data. A number of specialized spatial data processing systems were developed that extend cluster computing frameworks, such as Spark and Hadoop. However, these systems are characterized by limited or no support for spatial SQL query execution. The few systems that support SQL querying, suffer from the overheads of the pull-based model.We present a compilation-based distributed SQL query processing system. It follows a data-centric query compilation approach that takes a SQL query and generates distributed C++ (UPC++) based physical query plans. The generated code is compiled and executed on a distributed in-memory high performance framework based on the Partitioned Global Address Space (PGAS) paradigm. We also introduce morsel-driven parallelism for scalable spatial query execution in a distributed runtime. We conduct experimental evaluation of our system with two real-world datasets on a number of spatial query workloads. Experimental results demonstrate that our system performs significantly better than a leading spatial big data system Apache Sedona and distributed parallel relational database Citus.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207