Source author record

Jens Dittrich

Jens Dittrich appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Databases Digital Libraries Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing

Catalog footprint

What is connected

4works

3topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2014arXiv

Main Memory Adaptive Indexing for Multi-core Systems

Adaptive indexing is a concept that considers index creation in databases as a by-product of query processing; as opposed to traditional full index creation where the indexing effort is performed up front before answering any queries. Adaptive indexing has received a considerable amount of attention, and several algorithms have been proposed over the past few years; including a recent experimental study comparing a large number of existing methods. Until now, however, most adaptive indexing algorithms have been designed single-threaded, yet with multi-core systems already well established, the idea of designing parallel algorithms for adaptive indexing is very natural. In this regard only one parallel algorithm for adaptive indexing has recently appeared in the literature: The parallel version of standard cracking. In this paper we describe three alternative parallel algorithms for adaptive indexing, including a second variant of a parallel standard cracking algorithm. Additionally, we describe a hybrid parallel sorting algorithm, and a NUMA-aware method based on sorting. We then thoroughly compare all these algorithms experimentally; along a variant of a recently published parallel version of radix sort. Parallel sorting algorithms serve as a realistic baseline for multi-threaded adaptive indexing techniques. In total we experimentally compare seven parallel algorithms. Additionally, we extensively profile all considered algorithms. The initial set of experiments considered in this paper indicates that our parallel algorithms significantly improve over previously known ones. Our results suggest that, although adaptive indexing algorithms are a good design choice in single-threaded environments, the rules change considerably in the parallel case. That is, in future highly-parallel environments, sorting algorithms could be serious alternatives to adaptive indexing.

preprint2012arXiv

Only Aggressive Elephants are Fast Elephants

Yellow elephants are slow. A major reason is that they consume their inputs entirely before responding to an elephant rider's orders. Some clever riders have trained their yellow elephants to only consume parts of the inputs before responding. However, the teaching time to make an elephant do that is high. So high that the teaching lessons often do not pay off. We take a different approach. We make elephants aggressive; only this will make them very fast. We propose HAIL (Hadoop Aggressive Indexing Library), an enhancement of HDFS and Hadoop MapReduce that dramatically improves runtimes of several classes of MapReduce jobs. HAIL changes the upload pipeline of HDFS in order to create different clustered indexes on each data block replica. An interesting feature of HAIL is that we typically create a win-win situation: we improve both data upload to HDFS and the runtime of the actual Hadoop MapReduce job. In terms of data upload, HAIL improves over HDFS by up to 60% with the default replication factor of three. In terms of query execution, we demonstrate that HAIL runs up to 68x faster than Hadoop. In our experiments, we use six clusters including physical and EC2 clusters of up to 100 nodes. A series of scalability experiments also demonstrates the superiority of HAIL.

preprint2012arXiv

Towards Zero-Overhead Adaptive Indexing in Hadoop

Several research works have focused on supporting index access in MapReduce systems. These works have allowed users to significantly speed up selective MapReduce jobs by orders of magnitude. However, all these proposals require users to create indexes upfront, which might be a difficult task in certain applications (such as in scientific and social applications) where workloads are evolving or hard to predict. To overcome this problem, we propose LIAH (Lazy Indexing and Adaptivity in Hadoop), a parallel, adaptive approach for indexing at minimal costs for MapReduce systems. The main idea of LIAH is to automatically and incrementally adapt to users' workloads by creating clustered indexes on HDFS data blocks as a byproduct of executing MapReduce jobs. Besides distributing indexing efforts over multiple computing nodes, LIAH also parallelises indexing with both map tasks computation and disk I/O. All this without any additional data copy in main memory and with minimal synchronisation. The beauty of LIAH is that it piggybacks index creation on map tasks, which read relevant data from disk to main memory anyways. Hence, LIAH does not introduce any additional read I/O-costs and exploit free CPU cycles. As a result and in contrast to existing adaptive indexing works, LIAH has a very low (or invisible) indexing overhead, usually for the very first job. Still, LIAH can quickly converge to a complete index, i.e. all HDFS data blocks are indexed. Especially, LIAH can trade early job runtime improvements with fast complete index convergence. We compare LIAH with HAIL, a state-of-the-art indexing technique, as well as with standard Hadoop with respect to indexing overhead and workload performance.

preprint2011arXiv

PaperBricks: An Alternative to Complete-Story Peer Reviewing

The peer review system as used in several computer science communities has several flaws including long review times, overloaded reviewers, as well as fostering of niche topics. These flaws decrease quality, lower impact, slowdown the innovation process, and lead to frustration of authors, readers, and reviewers. In order to fix this, we propose a new peer review system termed paper bricks. Paper bricks has several advantages over the existing system including shorter publications, better competition for new ideas, as well as an accelerated innovation process. Furthermore, paper bricks may be implemented with minimal change to the existing peer review systems.