Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

John Hugg

dblp:09/3149 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
3 papers
Distributed systems · 78% Memory systems · 22%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Database system architecture and tuning · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Distributed systems › consistency models
bounded staleness
0.912025
Skybridge: Bounded Staleness for Distributed Caches · OSDI 2025
Memory systems
cache coherence
0.912025
Skybridge: Bounded Staleness for Distributed Caches · OSDI 2025
Distributed systems
consistency models
0.912025
Skybridge: Bounded Staleness for Distributed Caches · OSDI 2025
Distributed systems
distributed caching
0.912025
Skybridge: Bounded Staleness for Distributed Caches · OSDI 2025
Distributed systems
replication
0.412020
FlightTracker: Consistency across Read-Optimized Online Stores at Facebook · OSDI 2020
Database system architecture and tuning › analytical database system
read-optimized database
0.112020
FlightTracker: Consistency across Read-Optimized Online Stores at Facebook · OSDI 2020
Database system architecture and tuning › main-memory database
in-memory OLTP
0.112008
H-store: a high-performance, distributed main memory transaction processing system · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2008
Distributed systems
distributed database
0.012008
H-store: a high-performance, distributed main memory transaction processing system · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2008

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

stored procedures · 0.2multi-core execution · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Skybridge: Bounded Staleness for Distributed Caches
Robert Lyerly, Scott Pruett, Kevin Doherty, Greg Rogers, Nathan Bronson, John Hugg
OSDI6
2020 FlightTracker: Consistency across Read-Optimized Online Stores at Facebook
Scott Pruett, Kevin Doherty, Jinyu Han, Dmitri Petrov, Jim Carrig, John Hugg, Nathan Bronson
OSDI7
2009 Dynamic ham-sandwich cuts in the plane
Timothy G. Abbott, Michael A. Burr, Timothy M. Chan, Erik D. Demaine, Martin L. Demaine, John Hugg, Daniel M. Kane, Stefan Langerman, Jelani Nelson, Eynat Rafalin, Kathryn Seyboth, Vincent Yeung
Comput. Geom.6
2008 H-store: a high-performance, distributed main memory transaction processing system
abstract
Our previous work has shown that architectural and application shifts have resulted in modern OLTP databases increasingly falling short of optimal performance [10]. In particular, the availability of multiple-cores, the abundance of main memory, the lack of user stalls, and the dominant use of stored procedures are factors that portend a clean-slate redesign of RDBMSs. This previous work showed that such a redesign has the potential to outperform legacy OLTP databases by a significant factor. These results, however, were obtained using a bare-bones prototype that was developed just to demonstrate the potential of such a system. We have since set out to design a more complete execution platform, and to implement some of the ideas presented in the original paper. Our demonstration presented here provides insight on the development of a distributed main memory OLTP database and allows for the further study of the challenges inherent in this operating environment.
Robert Kallman, Hideaki Kimura 0001, Jonathan Natkins, Andrew Pavlo, Alexander Rasin, Stanley B. Zdonik, Evan P. C. Jones, Samuel Madden 0001, Michael Stonebraker, John Hugg, Daniel J. Abadi
Proc. VLDB Endow.11
2006 An Experimental Study of Old and New Depth Measures
abstract
Data depth is a statistical analysis method that assigns a numeric value to a point based on its centrality relative to a data set. Examples include the half-space depth (also known as Tukey depth), convex-hull peeling depth and L1 depth. Data depth has significant potential as a data analysis tool. The lack of efficient computational tools for depth based analysis of large high-dimensional data sets, however, prevents it from being in widespread use. We provide an experimental evaluation of several existing depth measures on different types of data sets, recognize problems with the existing measures and suggest modifications. Specifically, we show how the L1 depth contours are not indicative of shape and suggest a PCA-based scaling that handles this problem; we demonstrate how most existing depth measures are unable to cope with multimodal data sets and how the newly suggested proximity graph depth addresses this issue; and we explore how depth measures perform when the underlying distribution is not elliptic. Our experimental tool is of independent interest: it is an interactive software tool for the generation of data sets and visualization of the performance of multiple depth measures. The tool uses a hierarchical render-pipeline to allow for diverse data sets and fine control of the visual result. With this tool, new ideas in the field of data depth can be evaluated visually and quickly, allowing researchers to assess and adjust current depth functions.
John Hugg, Eynat Rafalin, Kathryn Seyboth, Diane L. Souvaine
ALENEX1