Large organizations have a multitude of data sources across the enterprise and want to obtain business value from all of them. While the majority of these data sources may be consolidated in an enterprise data warehouse, many business units have their own data marts where analysis is carried out against data stored in multidimensional data structures. It is often critical to pose queries which span both these sources. This is a challenge since these sources have differing models and query languages (SQL vs MDX). The Siebel Analytics Server enables this requirement to be fulfilled. In this paper, we describe how the multidimensional metadata is modeled relationally within Siebel Analytics, efficient SQL to MDX translation algorithms and the conversion protocols required to convert a multidimensional result into a relational rowset.

No abstract available.

We present a scalable distributed data structure called LH*. LH* generalizes Linear Hashing (LH) to distributed RAM and disk files. An LH* file can be created from records with primary keys, or objects with OIDs, provided by any number of distributed and autonomous clients. It does not require a central directory, and grows gracefully, through splits of one bucket at a time, to virtually any number of servers. The number of messages per random insertion is one in general, and three in the worst case, regardless of the file size. The number of messages per key search is two in general, and four in the worst case. The file supports parallel operations, e.g., hash joins and scans. Performing a parallel operation on a file of M buckets costs at most 2 M + 1 messages, and between 1 and O (log 2 M rounds of messages. We first describle the basic LH* scheme where a coordinator site manages abucket splits, and splits a bucket every time a collision occurs. We show that the average load factor of an LH* file is 65%–70% regardless of file size, and bucket capacity. We then enhance the scheme with load control, performed at no additional message cost. The average load factor then increases to 80–95%. These values are about that of LH, but the load factor for LH* varies more. We nest define LH* schemes without a coordinator. We show that insert and search costs are the same as for the basic scheme. The splitting cost decreases on the average, but becomes more variable, as cascading splits are needed to prevent file overload. Next, we briefly describe two variants of splitting policy, using parallel splits and presplitting that should enhance performance for high-performance applications. All together, we show that LH* files can efficiently scale to files that are orders of magnitude larger in size than single-site files. LH* files that reside in main memory may also be much faster than single-site disk files. Finally, LH* files can be more efficient than any distributed file with a centralized directory, or a static parallel or distributed hash file.

The goal of the Papyrus project [3] is to provide tools and services to enable the integration and parallelization of specialized data managers so that data-intensive applications can be constructed easily and efficiently. In our terminology, a data manager (DM) is a set of specialized methods that manage persistent data. A collection of functions defines the interface to a DM and provides the only means of accessing its persistent data.

LH* generalizes Linear Hashing to parallel or distributed RAM and disk files. An LH* file can be created from objects provided by any number of distributed and autonomous clients. It can grow gracefully, one bucket at a time, to virtually any number of servers. The number of messages per insertion is one in general, and three in the worst case. The number of messages per retrieval is two in general, and four in the worst case. The load factor can be about constant, 65-95%, depending on the file parameters. The file can also support parallel operations. An LH* file can be much faster than a single site disk file, and/or can hold a much larger number of objects. It can be more efficient than any file with a centralized directory, or a static parallel or distributed hash file.

Recently we have proposed an adaptive, random sampling algorithm for general query size estimation. In earlier work we analyzed the asymptotic efficiency and accuracy of the algorithm, in this paper we investigate its practicality as applied to selects and joins. First, we extend our previous analysis to provide significantly improved bounds on the amount of sampling necessary for a given level of accuracy. Next, we provide “sanity bounds” to deal with queries for which the underlying data is extremely skewed or the query result is very small. Finally, we report on the performance of the estimation algorithm as implemented in a host language on a commercial relational system. The results are encouraging, even with this loose coupling between the estimation algorithm and the DBMS.

The design of the Gamma database machine and the techniques employed in its implementation are described. Gamma is a relational database machine currently operating on an Intel iPSC/2 hypercube with 32 processors and 32 disk drives. Gamma employs three key technical ideas which enable the architecture to be scaled to hundreds of processors. First, all relations are horizontally partitioned across multiple disk drives, enabling relations to be scanned in parallel. Second, parallel algorithms based on hashing are used to implement the complex relational operators, such as join and aggregate functions. Third, dataflow scheduling techniques are used to coordinate multioperator queries. By using these techniques, it is possible to control the execution of very complex queries with minimal coordination. The design of the Gamma software is described and a thorough performance evaluation of the iPSC/s hypercube version of Gamma is presented.>

In this paper we analyze and compare four parallel join algorithms. Grace and Hybrid hash represent the class of hash-based join methods, Simple hash represents a looping algorithm with hashing, and our last algorithm is the more traditional sort-merge. The performance of each of the algorithms with different tuple distribution policies, the addition of bit vector filters, varying amounts of main-memory for joining, and non-uniformly distributed join attribute values is studied. The Hybrid hash-join algorithm is found to be superior except when the join attribute values of the inner relation are non-uniformly distributed and memory is limited. In this case, a more conservative algorithm such as the sort-merge algorithm should be used. The Gamma database machine serves as the host for the performance comparison.

This paper presents the results of an initial performance evaluation of the Gamma database machine. In our experiments we measured the effect of relation size and indices on response time for selection, join, and aggregation queries, and single-tuple updates. A Teradata DBC/1012 database machine of similar size is used as a basis for interpreting the results obtained. We also analyze the performance of Gemma relative to the number of processors employed and study the impact of varying the memory size and disk page size on the execution time of a variety of selection and join queries. We analyze and interpret the results of these experiments based on our understanding of the system hardware and software, and conclude with an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of Gamma.