VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mohiuddin Abdul Qader
dblp:201/1389
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 5 · 3 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Systems, architecture and hardware · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
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
2 papers |
Indexing and storage engines · 46% Data stream processing · 26% Distributed and cloud data management · 20% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Performance modeling and evaluation · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Indexing and storage engines
LSM-tree |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Comparative Study of Secondary Indexing Techniques in LSM-based NoSQL Databases · SIGMOD Conference 2018 |
Indexing and storage engines
secondary index |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Comparative Study of Secondary Indexing Techniques in LSM-based NoSQL Databases · SIGMOD Conference 2018 |
Distributed and cloud data management › large-scale data management
scalable data management |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | A BAD Demonstration: Towards Big Active Data · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2017 |
Data models and query languages
NoSQL database |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | A Comparative Study of Secondary Indexing Techniques in LSM-based NoSQL Databases · SIGMOD Conference 2018 |
Performance modeling and evaluation › benchmarking
database system benchmarking |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | A Comparative Study of Secondary Indexing Techniques in LSM-based NoSQL Databases · SIGMOD Conference 2018 |
Data stream processing
continuous query processing |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | A BAD Demonstration: Towards Big Active Data · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2017 |
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Comprehensive Comparison of LSM Architectures for Spatial DataabstractSpatial indexes in traditional relational databases supported spatial queries in the pre-big data era. However, the volume and ingestion rate of spatial data is increasing rapidly in modern applications. Many big data systems use LSM tree as their storage structure in order to support write-intensive large-volume workloads, which are usually optimized for singledimensional data. Research has studied how to support spatial indexes on LSM systems, but have mainly focused on the local index organization, that is, how data is organized inside a single LSM component. In this paper, we study various aspects of spatial LSM indexing, including spatial merge policies, which determine when and how spatial components are merged. We consider both stack-based and leveled merge policies, which we have implemented on the same big data system. We evaluate the write and read performance on various workloads and discuss our findings and recommendations. A key finding is that Leveled policies are underperforming other merge policies for most types of spatial workloads. Qizhong Mao, Mohiuddin Abdul Qader, Vagelis Hristidis |
IEEE BigData | 2 |
| 2019 | Jungle: Towards Dynamically Adjustable Key-Value Store by Combining LSM-Tree and Copy-On-Write B+-Tree
Jung-Sang Ahn, Mohiuddin Abdul Qader, Woon-Hak Kang, Hieu Nguyen 0002, Guogen Zhang, Sami Ben-Romdhane |
HotStorage | 2 |
| 2019 | High-throughput publish/subscribe on top of LSM-based storage
Mohiuddin Abdul Qader, Vagelis Hristidis |
Distributed Parallel Databases | 1 |
| 2018 | A Comparative Study of Secondary Indexing Techniques in LSM-based NoSQL DatabasesabstractNoSQL databases are increasingly used in big data applications, because they achieve fast write throughput and fast lookups on the primary key. Many of these applications also require queries on non-primary attributes. For that reason, several NoSQL databases have added support for secondary indexes. However, these works are fragmented, as each system generally supports one type of secondary index, and may be using different names or no name at all to refer to such indexes. As there is no single system that supports all types of secondary indexes, no experimental head-to-head comparison or performance analysis of the various secondary indexing techniques in terms of throughput and space exists. In this paper, we present a taxonomy of NoSQL secondary indexes, broadly split into two classes: Embedded Indexes (i.e. lightweight filters embedded inside the primary table) and Stand-Alone Indexes (i.e. separate data structures). To ensure the fairness of our comparative study, we built a system, LevelDB++, on top of Google's popular open-source LevelDB key-value store. There, we implemented two Embedded Indexes and three state-of-the-art Stand-Alone indexes, which cover most of the popular NoSQL databases. Our comprehensive experimental study and theoretical evaluation show that none of these indexing techniques dominate the others: the embedded indexes offer superior write throughput and are more space efficient, whereas the stand-alone secondary indexes achieve faster query response times. Thus, the optimal choice of secondary index depends on the application workload. This paper provides an empirical guideline for choosing secondary indexes Mohiuddin Abdul Qader, Shiwen Cheng, Vagelis Hristidis |
SIGMOD Conference | 1 |
| 2017 | DualDB: An Efficient LSM-based Publish/Subscribe Storage SystemabstractPublish/Subscribe systems allow subscribers to monitor for events of interest generated by publishers. Current publish/subscribe query systems are efficient when the subscriptions (queries) are relatively static -- for instance, the set of followers in Twitter -- or can fit in memory. However, an increasing number of applications in this era of Big Data and Internet of Things (IoT) are based on a highly dynamic query paradigm, where continuous queries are in the millions and are created and expire in a rate comparable, or even higher, to that of the data (event) entries. For instance moving objects like airplanes, cars or sensors may continuously generate measurement data like air pressure or traffic, which are consumed by other moving objects. Mohiuddin Abdul Qader, Vagelis Hristidis |
SSDBM | 1 |
| 2017 | A BAD Demonstration: Towards Big Active DataabstractNearly all of today's Big Data systems are passive in nature. We demonstrate our Big Active Data ("BAD") system, a scalable system that continuously and reliably captures Big Data and facilitates the timely and automatic delivery of new information to a large population of interested users as well as supporting analyses of historical information. We built our BAD project by extending an existing scalable, open-source BDMS (AsterixDB [1]) in this active direction. In this demonstration, we allow our audience to participate in an emergency notification application built on top of our BAD platform, and highlight its capabilities. Steven Jacobs, Md. Yusuf Sarwar Uddin, Michael J. Carey 0001, Vagelis Hristidis, Vassilis J. Tsotras, Nalini Venkatasubramanian, Syed Safir, Purvi Kaul, Xikui Wang, Mohiuddin Abdul Qader |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 11 |