abstract
This commit is contained in:
parent
93e91fc502
commit
40b412eee0
1 changed files with 13 additions and 16 deletions
|
@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
|
||||||
\begin{document}
|
\begin{document}
|
||||||
\title{\vspace*{-36pt}\yad: A Flexible Transactional Storage System\vspace*{-36pt}}
|
\title{\vspace*{-36pt}\yad: A Flexible Transactional Storage System\vspace*{-36pt}}
|
||||||
%\author{}
|
%\author{}
|
||||||
|
\date{Paper 198}
|
||||||
\maketitle
|
\maketitle
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -42,21 +42,18 @@
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
{\em Existing transactional systems are designed to handle specific
|
{\em Existing transactional systems are designed to handle specific
|
||||||
workloads well. Unfortunately, these implementations are generally
|
workloads well. Unfortunately, these implementations are generally
|
||||||
monolithic, and do not generalize to other applications or classes of
|
monolithic and hide the transaction support under a SQL interface, which forces many systems to ``work around'' the relational data model.
|
||||||
problems. As a result, many systems are forced to ``work around'' the
|
Manifestations of this problem include the
|
||||||
data models provided by a transactional storage layer. Manifestations
|
%``impedance mismatch'' in the database world, and
|
||||||
of this problem include ``impedance mismatch'' in the database world,
|
the poor fit of existing transactional storage systems to persistent
|
||||||
and the poor fit of existing transactional storage management systems
|
objects and hierarchical or semi-structured data, such as XML or
|
||||||
to hierarchical or semi-structured data types such as XML or
|
scientific data. This work proposes a novel flexible transaction
|
||||||
scientific data. This work proposes a novel set of abstractions for
|
framework intended for non-database transactional systems; for
|
||||||
transactional storage systems and generalizes an existing
|
example, \yad makes it is easy to develop high-performance transactional
|
||||||
transactional storage algorithm to provide an implementation of these
|
data structures. It generally outperforms Berkeley DB, and its
|
||||||
primitives. Due to the extensibility of our architecture, the
|
extensibility enables optimizations that outperform Berkeley DB by 2x
|
||||||
implementation is competitive with existing systems on conventional
|
and MySQL by up to 5x. We present novel optimizations for object
|
||||||
workloads and outperforms existing systems on specialized
|
serialization and graph traversal that demonstrate this flexibility.}
|
||||||
workloads. Finally, we discuss characteristics of this new
|
|
||||||
architecture that provide opportunities for novel classes of
|
|
||||||
optimizations and enhanced usability for application developers.}
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
%Although many systems provide transactionally consistent data
|
%Although many systems provide transactionally consistent data
|
||||||
%management, existing implementations are generally monolithic and tied
|
%management, existing implementations are generally monolithic and tied
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue