Abstract
Relational database management systems (RDBMSs) have been a common option to manage structured data over the past decades. In recent years, with the prevalence of big data applications, vast unstructured and semi-structured data are generated, deeply challenging the relational model used in RDBMSs. For this reason, a wide spectrum of NoSQL databases are developed for managing unstructured, semi-structured or structured data. For example, graph database management systems (GDBMSs) are commonly used as an important category of NoSQL databases, to manage sophisticated graph data as well as relational data. Nonetheless, as claimed in existing literatures, both RDBMSs and GDBMSs are capable of managing graph data and relational data, the boundaries of them still remain unclear. In this paper, we propose a unified benchmark for RDBMSs and GDBMSs, to evaluate them under the same metrics, and report which category is better in different application scenarios. We conduct extensive experiments over the unified benchmark, and report our findings: (1) RDBMSs are significantly faster for aggregations and order by operations, (2) GDBMSs are shown to be superior for projection, multi-table join and deep recursive operations, (3) GDBMSs and RDBMSs are comparable for two-table join and shallow recursive operations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
TPC-H (2012). http://www.tpc.org/tpc_documents_current_versions/pdf/tpc-h_v2.17.1.pdf
Iosup, A., et al.: LDBC graphalytics: a benchmark for large-scale graph analysis on parallel and distributed platforms. Proc. VLDB Endow. 9(13), 1317–1328 (2016). https://doi.org/10.14778/3007263.3007270
TPC.TPC-C, February 2010. http://www.tpc.org/tpc_documents_current_versions/pdf/tpc-c_v5.11.0.pdf
TPC.TPC-DS, November 2015. http://www.tpc.org/tpc_documents_current_versions/pdf/tpc-ds_v2.1.0.pdf
Janusgraph distributed graph database (2017). http://janusgraph.org
Wood, P.T.: Query languages for graph databases. SIGMOD Rec. 41(1), 50–60 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2206869.2206879
Barceló Baeza, P.: Querying graph databases. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, ser. PODS 2013, pp. 175–188. ACM, New York (2013). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2463664.2465216
Cormen, T.H., Leiserson, C.E., Rivest, R.L., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms, 3rd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)
Ordonez, C.: Optimizing recursive queries in SQL. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, ser. SIGMOD 2005, pp. 834–839. ACM, New York (2005). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1066157.1066260
Melton, J., Simon, A.: SQL:1999: Understanding Relational Language Components. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (2001)
Finkelstein, I.M.S.J., Mattos, N., Pirahesh, H.: Expressing recursive queries in SQL. ISO-IEC JTC1/SC21 WG3 DBL MCI, X3H2-96-075 (1996)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ding, P., Cheng, Y., Lu, W., Huang, H., Du, X. (2019). Which Category Is Better: Benchmarking the RDBMSs and GDBMSs. In: Shao, J., Yiu, M., Toyoda, M., Zhang, D., Wang, W., Cui, B. (eds) Web and Big Data. APWeb-WAIM 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11642. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26075-0_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26075-0_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26074-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26075-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)