Skip to main content
Log in

An empirical performance comparison of some variations of thek-d Tree andBD tree

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer & Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Database applications very often require a sophisticated class of storage structures in order to answer different types of queries efficiently. This often dictates that the file should be organized on multiple keys. Several storage structures have been proposed to satisfy these needs. Most of these are a generalization of the storage structures used for managing one-dimensional data. Thek-d tree is one such example and it is a natural generalization of the standard one-dimensional binary search tree. Recently, a new storage structure, called theBD tree, was proposed to manage multidimensional data. This structure has good dynamic characteristics. Several variations are possible on the basick-d tree structure. This paper studies the performance implications of three variations. Further, it provides an empirical performance comparison of thek-d tree andBD tree in database applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. R. Rivest, Partial-Match Retrieval Algorithms,SIAM J. Comput.,5(1):19–50 (March 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. L. Bentley and M. I. Shamos, A Problem in Multivariate Statistics: Algorithm, Data Structure and Applications,15th Allerton Conf. on Communication, Control, and Computing, pp. 193–201 (1977).

  3. J. L. Bentley, Multidimensional Divide- and-Conquer,CACM,23(4):214–228 (April 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. L. Fredman, A Lower Bound on the Complexity of Orthogonal Range Queries,J. ACM,28(4):696–705 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. L. Bentley and H. A. Maurer, Efficient Worst-Case Data Structures for Range Searching,Acta Information, Vol. 13, pp. 155–168 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  6. G. S. Lueker and D. E. Willard, A Data Structure for Dynamic Range Queries,Inf. Processing Letters,5(5):209–213 (December 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. E. Willard, New Data Structures for Orthogonal Range Queries,SIAM J. Comp.,14(1):232–253 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. T. Lee and C. K. Wong, Quintary Trees: A File Structure for Multidimensional Database Systems,ACM Trans. Database Syst.,5(3):339–353 (September 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. L. Bentley, Multidimensional Binary Search Trees Used for Associative Searching,CACM,18(9):509–517 (September 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. L. Bentley, Multidimensional Binary Search Trees in Database Applications,IEEE Trans. Software Eng.,SE-5(4):333–340 (July 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Orenstein, Multidimensional Tries Used for Associative Searching,Info. Processing Letters,14(4):150–157 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. P. Dandamudi, Storage Structures for Main Memory Based Database Systems, M.Sc. thesis, Department of Computational Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  13. S. P. Dandamudi and P. G. Sorenson, Performance of a Modifiedk-d Tree, Tech. Rep. 84-10, Department of Computational Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Y. Ohsawa and M. Sakauchi, TheBD-Tree—A NewN-Dimensional Data Structure With Highly Efficient Dynamic Characteristics,IFIP Conf., Paris, pp. 539–544 (1983).

  15. D. T. Lee and C. K. Wong, Worst Case Analysis for Region and Partial Region Searches in Multidimensional Binary Search Trees and Balanced Quad Trees,Acta Informatica,9:23–29 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. L. Bentley and W. A. Burkhard, Heuristics for Partial Match Retrieval Data Base Design,Info. Processing Letters,4(5):132–135 (February 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. H. Friedman, J. L. Bentley, and R. A. Finkel, An Algorithm for Finding Best Matches in Logarithmic Expected Time,ACM Trans. Math. Software,3(3):209–226 (September 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  18. S. P. Dandamudi and P. G. Sorenson, Algorithms for theBD Tree Structure, Tech. Rep. 84-11, Department of Computational Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. Comer, The UbiquitousB-Tree,ACM Comput. Surv.,11(2):121–137 (June 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. E. Knuth,The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 3: Sorting and Searching, Addison-Wesley, Reading (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. Nievergelt, H. Hinterberger, and K. C. Sevcik, The Grid File: An Adaptable, Symmetric Multikey File Structure,ACM Trans. Database Systems,9(1):38–71 (March 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. P. Kriegel, Performance Comparison of Index Structures for Multikey Retrieval,Proc. ACM SIGMOD 1984, Boston, pp. 186–196 (1984).

  23. S. Christodoulakis, Estimating Selectivities in Data Bases, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto (1981).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dandamudi, S.P., Sorenson, P.G. An empirical performance comparison of some variations of thek-d Tree andBD tree. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences 14, 135–159 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991003

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991003

Key words

Navigation