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

Michael Cammert

dblp:17/4340 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—ORCID · none

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

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 3 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.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
3 papers
Data stream processing · 73% Query processing and optimization · 22% Data integration and cleaning · 5%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Data stream processing
continuous query processing
0.122006
An Approach to Adaptive Memory Management in Data Stream Systems · ICDE 2006
Stream Processing in Production-to-Business Software · ICDE 2006
Query processing and optimization › adaptive query processing
query re-optimization
0.112008
A Cost-Based Approach to Adaptive Resource Management in Data Stream Systems · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2008
Data stream processing › continuous query processing
sliding window query
0.112006
An Approach to Adaptive Memory Management in Data Stream Systems · ICDE 2006

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

load shedding · 0.1cost model · 0.1stream processing infrastructure · 0.1query re-optimization · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 A Cost-Based Approach to Adaptive Resource Management in Data Stream Systems
abstract
Data stream management systems need to control their resources adaptively since stream characteristics as well as query workload vary over time. In this paper we investigate an approach to adaptive resource management for continuous sliding window queries that adjusts window sizes and time granularities to keep resource usage within bounds. These two novel techniques differ from standard load shedding approaches based on sampling as they ensure exact query answers for given user-defined Quality of Service specifications, even under query re-optimization. In order to quantify the effects of both techniques on the various operations in a query plan, we develop an appropriate cost model for estimating operator resource allocation in terms of memory usage and processing costs. A thorough experimental study not only validates the accuracy of our cost model but also demonstrates the efficacy and scalability of the proposed techniques.
Michael Cammert, Jürgen Krämer, Bernhard Seeger, Sonny Vaupel
IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng.1
2006 Stream Processing in Production-to-Business Software
abstract
In order to support continuous queries over data streams, a plethora of suitable techniques as well as prototypes have been developed and evaluated in recent years. In particular, it is of utmost importance to confirm their necessity and feasibility in real-world applications. For that reason, we have successfully coupled our infrastructure for data stream processing (PIPES) with an industrial Production-to-Business software (i-Plant) dedicated to highly automated manufacturing processes.
Michael Cammert, Christoph Heinz, Jürgen Krämer, Tobias Riemenschneider, Maxim Schwarzkopf, Bernhard Seeger, Alexander Zeiss
ICDE1
2006 An Approach to Adaptive Memory Management in Data Stream Systems
abstract
Adaptivity is a challenging open issue in data stream management. In this paper, we tackle the problem of memory adaptivity inside a system executing temporal sliding window queries over continuous data streams. Two different techniques to control the memory usage at runtime are proposed which refer to changes in window sizes and time granularities. Both techniques differ from standard load shedding approaches based on sampling as they ensure precise query answers for user-defined Quality of Service (QoS) specifications, even under query re-optimization.
Michael Cammert, Jürgen Krämer, Bernhard Seeger, Sonny Vaupel
ICDE1