skip to main content
10.1145/508791.508964acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Dynamic memory allocation strategies for parallel query execution

Authors Info & Claims
Published:11 March 2002Publication History

ABSTRACT

In the decision support queries which manipulate large data volumes, it is frequent that a query constituted by several joins can not be computed completely in memory. In this paper, we propose three strategies allowing to assign the memory of a shared-nothing parallel architecture to operation clones of a query. The performance evaluation of the three strategies shows that the strategies which favor the operation clones using a lot of memory obtain a better response time than the strategy which favors the clones using little memory. The main contribution of this paper is to take into account the available memory sizes on every processor and to avoid allotting the same processor to two operation clones that must run in parallel.

References

  1. Bonneau S., Hameurlain A. Hybrid Simultaneous Scheduling and Mapping in SQL Multi-Query Parallelization. Proc. of the 10 th intl. Conf. on Database and Expert Systems Applications, DEXA, LNCS 1677, Florence, Sept. 1999, pp. 88-99.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bouganim L. et al. Memory-Adaptive Scheduling for Large Query Execution. Proc. of the 8th intl. Conf. CIKM, Bethesda, Maryland, Nov. 1998, pp. 105-115.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Chen M. S. et al. Scheduling and Processor Allocation for Parallel Execution of Multi-join Queries. Proc. 8th Intl. Conf. Data Eng., Tempe, Feb. 1992, pp. 58-67.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chen M. S. et al. Using Segmented Right-Deep Trees for the Execution of Pipelined Hash Joins. Proc. of the 18th VLDB Conf., Vancouver, Aug. 1992, pp. 15-26.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Chou H., DeWitt D. An Evaluation of Buffer Management Stratégies for Relational Database Systems. Proc. of the 11th Intl VLDB Conf., Stockholm, Aug. 1985, pp. 127-141.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Conway R. W. et al. The Theory of Scheduling. Ed. Addition-Wesley, 1967.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Ganguly S., and al. Efficient and Accurate Cost Models for Parallel Query Optimization. Symposium in Principles of Database Systems PODS'96 , june 1996, pp. 172-182.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Garofalakis M. N., Ioannidis Y. E. Parallel Query Scheduling and Optimization with Time- and Space- Shared Resources, Proc. of the 23rd VLDB Conf., Athens, 1997, pp. 296-305.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hameurlain A., Morvan F. Scheduling and Mapping for Parallel Execution of Extended SQL Queries. Proc. of the 4th intl. Conf. CIKM, Baltimore, Nov-Dec 1995, pp. 197-204.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Helal A. et al. Dynamic Data Reallocation for Skew Management in Shared-Nothing Parallel Databases, Distributed and Parallel Databases, Vol. 5, 1997. pp. 271-288.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Mehta M., DeWitt D. Dynamic Memory Allocation for Multiple-Query Workload. Proc. of the 19th Intl VLDB Conf., Dublin, Aug. 1993, pp. 354-367.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mehta M., DeWitt D. Data Placement in Shared-Nothing Parallel Database Systems. The VLDB Journal, 1997, N°6, pp. 53-72.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Morvan F., Hameurlain A. Dynamic Memory Allocation Strategies for Parallel Query Execution. Technical report, IRIT/2001-14-R, June 2001.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Nag B., DeWitt D. Memory Allocation Strategies for Complex Decision Support Queries. Proc. of the 8th intl. Conf. CIKM, Bethesda, Nov. 1998, pp. 116-123.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ng R. et al. Flexible Buffer Allocation Based on Marginal Gains. Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD'91 Conf. on Management of Data, Denver, May 1991, pp. 387-396.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Schneider D., DeWitt D. A performance Evaluation of Four Parallel Join Algorithms in a Shared-Nothing Multiprocessor Environment. Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf. on Management of Data, Portland, June 1989, pp. 110-121.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Schneider D., DeWitt D. Tradeoffs in Processing Complex Join Queries via Hashing in Multiprcessor Database Machines. Proc. of the 16th VLDB Conf., Brisbane, Aug. 1990, pp. 469-480.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Shekita E. J. et al. Multi-Join Optimization for Symmetric Multiprocessors. 19th Intl. Conf. on VLDB, Dublin, Aug. 1993, pp. 479-492.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Dynamic memory allocation strategies for parallel query execution

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              SAC '02: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM symposium on Applied computing
              March 2002
              1200 pages
              ISBN:1581134452
              DOI:10.1145/508791

              Copyright © 2002 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 11 March 2002

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • Article

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader