EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shivakumar Venkataraman
dblp:85/3595
· DBLP profile ↗
13ranked-venue papers
5as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 11 · 5 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 2Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
10 papers |
Distributed and cloud data management · 32% Database system architecture and tuning · 30% Query processing and optimization · 15% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
7 papers |
Distributed systems · 58% Cloud and datacenter computing · 32% Storage systems · 6% |
Topics — the 22 heaviest of 28, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Distributed and cloud data management › federated database
federated query processing |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | F1 Query: Declarative Querying at Scale · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2018 |
Distributed systems
fault tolerance |
0.3 | 5 | 2014 | Photon: fault-tolerant and scalable joining of continuous data streams · SIGMOD Conference 2013 Datacenters as Computers: Google Engineering & Database Research Perspectives · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2014 Mesa: Geo-Replicated, Near Real-Time, Scalable Data Warehousing · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2014 |
Information retrieval › web search
data freshness |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Shasta: Interactive Reporting At Scale · SIGMOD Conference 2016 |
Query processing and optimization
online query processing |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Shasta: Interactive Reporting At Scale · SIGMOD Conference 2016 |
Data stream processing
stream join |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Photon: fault-tolerant and scalable joining of continuous data streams · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Distributed systems › fault tolerance › fault-tolerant distributed systems
fault-tolerant stream processing |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Photon: fault-tolerant and scalable joining of continuous data streams · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Distributed systems › distributed system architecture
geo-distributed systems |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Photon: fault-tolerant and scalable joining of continuous data streams · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Indexing and storage engines
buffer management |
0.0 | 2 | 1998 | Remote Load-Sensitive Caching for Multi-Server Database Systems · ICDE 1998 Memory Management for Scalable Web Data Servers · ICDE 1997 |
Storage systems
disk array |
0.0 | 2 | 1994 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1994 The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ISCA 1993 |
Query processing and optimization › query optimization
cost-based optimization |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Cost-Based Optimization of Decision Support Queries Using Transient Views · SIGMOD Conference 1998 |
Distributed and cloud data management › distributed database architecture
database cluster |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Remote Load-Sensitive Caching for Multi-Server Database Systems · ICDE 1998 |
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel query processing |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Parallelising OODBMS Traversals: A Performance Evaluation · VLDB J. 1996 |
Distributed and cloud data management
data placement |
0.0 | 1 | 1995 | The Impact of Data Placement on Memory Management for Multi-Server OODBMS · ICDE 1995 |
Indexing and storage engines › storage management
memory management |
0.0 | 1 | 1995 | The Impact of Data Placement on Memory Management for Multi-Server OODBMS · ICDE 1995 |
Distributed systems › distributed control
distributed control architecture |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1994 |
Storage systems › storage reliability
RAID |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1994 |
Storage systems › disk array
RAID architectures |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ISCA 1993 |
Storage systems
storage reliability |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ISCA 1993 |
Data integration and cleaning › heterogeneous data management
heterogeneous database systems |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Heterogeneous Database Query Optimization in DB2 Universal DataJoiner · VLDB 1998 |
Data integration and cleaning
heterogeneous data source integration |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Cost-Based Optimization of Decision Support Queries Using Transient Views · SIGMOD Conference 1998 |
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
single point of failure |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1994 |
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel architecture |
0.0 | 1 | 1993 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID Architecture · ISCA 1993 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
declarative querying · 0.7SQL · 0.7near real-time ingestion · 0.4geo-replication · 0.4query transformation · 0.2join processing over many tables · 0.2simulation · 0.0global LRU approximation · 0.0client-server page replacement · 0.0hybrid algorithm · 0.0request scheduling · 0.0distributed parity computation · 0.0distributed controller · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | F1 Query: Declarative Querying at ScaleabstractF1 Query is a stand-alone, federated query processing platform that executes SQL queries against data stored in different file-based formats as well as different storage systems at Google (e.g., Bigtable, Spanner, Google Spreadsheets, etc.). F1 Query eliminates the need to maintain the traditional distinction between different types of data processing workloads by simultaneously supporting: (i) OLTP-style point queries that affect only a few records; (ii) low-latency OLAP querying of large amounts of data; and (iii) large ETL pipelines. F1 Query has also significantly reduced the need for developing hard-coded data processing pipelines by enabling declarative queries integrated with custom business logic. F1 Query satisfies key requirements that are highly desirable within Google: (i) it provides a unified view over data that is fragmented and distributed over multiple data sources; (ii) it leverages datacenter resources for performant query processing with high throughput and low latency; (iii) it provides high scalability for large data sizes by increasing computational parallelism; and (iv) it is extensible and uses innovative approaches to integrate complex business logic in declarative query processing. This paper presents the end-to-end design of F1 Query. Evolved out of F1, the distributed database originally built to manage Google's advertising data, F1 Query has been in production for multiple years at Google and serves the querying needs of a large number of users and systems. Bart Samwel, John Cieslewicz, Ben Handy, Jason Govig, Petros Venetis, Chanjun Yang, Keith Peters, Jeff Shute, Daniel Tenedorio, Himani Apte, Felix Weigel, David Wilhite, Jiexing Li, Zhan Yuan, Craig Chasseur, Ian Rae, Anurag Biyani, Andrew Harn, Andrey Gubichev, Amr El-Helw, Orri Erling, Zhepeng Yan, Mohan Yang, Yiqun Wei, Thanh Do, Colin Zheng, Goetz Graefe, Somayeh Sardashti, Ahmed M. Aly, Divyakant Agrawal, Shivakumar Venkataraman |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 36 |
| 2016 | Shasta: Interactive Reporting At ScaleabstractWe describe Shasta, a middleware system built at Google to support interactive reporting in complex user-facing applications related to Google's Internet advertising business. Shasta targets applications with challenging requirements: First, user query latencies must be low. Second, underlying transactional data stores have complex "read-unfriendly" schemas, placing significant transformation logic between stored data and the read-only views that Shasta exposes to its clients. This transformation logic must be expressed in a way that scales to large and agile engineering teams. Finally, Shasta targets applications with strong data freshness requirements, making it challenging to precompute query results using common techniques such as ETL pipelines or materialized views. Instead, online queries must go all the way from primary storage to user-facing views, resulting in complex queries joining 50 or more tables. Gokul Nath Babu Manoharan, Stephan Ellner, Karl Schnaitter, Sridatta Chegu, Alejandro Estrella-Balderrama, Stephan Gudmundson, Apurv Gupta, Ben Handy, Bart Samwel, Chad Whipkey, Larysa Aharkava, Himani Apte, Nitin Gangahar, Shivakumar Venkataraman, Divyakant Agrawal, Jeffrey D. Ullman |
SIGMOD Conference | 15 |
| 2014 | Mesa: Geo-Replicated, Near Real-Time, Scalable Data WarehousingabstractMesa is a highly scalable analytic data warehousing system that stores critical measurement data related to Google's Internet advertising business. Mesa is designed to satisfy a complex and challenging set of user and systems requirements, including near real-time data ingestion and queryability, as well as high availability, reliability, fault tolerance, and scalability for large data and query volumes. Specifically, Mesa handles petabytes of data, processes millions of row updates per second, and serves billions of queries that fetch trillions of rows per day. Mesa is geo-replicated across multiple datacenters and provides consistent and repeatable query answers at low latency, even when an entire datacenter fails. This paper presents the Mesa system and reports the performance and scale that it achieves. Jason Govig, Adam Kirsch, Kelvin Chan, Sandeep Govind Dhoot, Abhilash Rajesh Kumar, Ankur Agiwal, Sanjay Bhansali, Mingsheng Hong, Jamie Cameron, Masood Siddiqi, Jeff Shute, Andrey Gubarev, Shivakumar Venkataraman, Divyakant Agrawal |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 18 |
| 2014 | Datacenters as Computers: Google Engineering & Database Research PerspectivesabstractIn this collaborative keynote address, we will share Google's experience in building a scalable data infrastructure that leverages datacenters for managing Google's advertising data over the last decade. In order to support the massive online advertising platform at Google, the data infrastructure must simultaneously support both transactional and analytical workloads. The focus of this talk will be to highlight how the datacenter architecture and the cloud computing paradigm has enabled us to manage the exponential growth in data volumes and user queries, make our services highly available and fault tolerant to massive datacenter outages, and deliver results with very low latencies. We note that other Internet companies have also undergone similar growth in data volumes and user queries. In fact, this phenomenon has resulted in at least two new terms in the technology lexicon: big data and cloud computing. Cloud computing (and datacenters) have been largely responsible for scaling the data volumes from terabytes range just a few years ago to now reaching in the exabyte range over the next couple of years. Delivering solutions at this scale that are fault-tolerant, latency sensitive, and highly available requires a combination of research advances with engineering ingenuity at Google and elsewhere. Next, we will try to answer the following question: is a datacenter just another (very large) computer? Or, does it fundamentally change the design principles for data-centric applications and systems. We will conclude with some of the unique research challenges that need to be addressed in order to sustain continuous growth in data volumes while supporting high throughput and low latencies. Shivakumar Venkataraman, Divyakant Agrawal |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 1 |
| 2013 | Photon: fault-tolerant and scalable joining of continuous data streamsabstractWeb-based enterprises process events generated by millions of users interacting with their websites. Rich statistical data distilled from combining such interactions in near real-time generates enormous business value. In this paper, we describe the architecture of Photon, a geographically distributed system for joining multiple continuously flowing streams of data in real-time with high scalability and low latency, where the streams may be unordered or delayed. The system fully tolerates infrastructure degradation and datacenter-level outages without any manual intervention. Photon guarantees that there will be no duplicates in the joined output (at-most-once semantics) at any point in time, that most joinable events will be present in the output in real-time (near-exact semantics), and exactly-once semantics eventually. Rajagopal Ananthanarayanan, Venkatesh Basker, Sumit Das 0004, Tianhao Qiu, Alexey Reznichenko, Deomid Ryabkov, Shivakumar Venkataraman |
SIGMOD Conference | 10 |
| 1998 | Remote Load-Sensitive Caching for Multi-Server Database SystemsabstractThe recent dramatic improvements in the performance of commodity hardware has made clusters of workstations or PCs an attractive and economical platform upon which to build scalable database servers. These clusters have large aggregate memory capacities, however, since this global memory is distributed, good algorithms are necessary for memory management, or this large aggregate memory will go underutilized. The goal of the study is to develop and evaluate buffer management algorithms for database clusters. We propose a new buffer management algorithm, remote load sensitive caching (RLS caching), that uses novel techniques to combine data placement with a simple modification of standard client server page replacement algorithms to approximate a global LRU page replacement policy. Through an implementation in the SHORE database system, we evaluate the performance of RLS caching against other buffer management algorithms. Our study demonstrates that RLS caching indeed effectively manages the distributed memory of a server cluster. Shivakumar Venkataraman, Jeffrey F. Naughton, Miron Livny |
ICDE | 1 |
| 1998 | Cost-Based Optimization of Decision Support Queries Using Transient ViewsabstractNext generation decision support applications, besides being capable of processing huge amounts of data, require the ability to integrate and reason over data from multiple, heterogeneous data sources. Often, these data sources differ in a variety of aspects such as their data models, the query languages they support, and their network protocols. Also, typically they are spread over a wide geographical area. The cost of processing decision support queries in such a setting is quite high. However, processing these queries often involves redundancies such as repeated access of same data source and multiple execution of similar processing sequences. Minimizing these redundancies would significantly reduce the query processing cost. In this paper, we (1) propose an architecture for processing complex decision support queries involving multiple, heterogeneous data sources Iyer N. Subramanian, Shivakumar Venkataraman |
SIGMOD Conference | 2 |
| 1998 | Heterogeneous Database Query Optimization in DB2 Universal DataJoiner
Shivakumar Venkataraman |
VLDB | 1 |
| 1997 | Memory Management for Scalable Web Data ServersabstractPopular Web sites are already experiencing very heavy loads, and these loads will only increase as the number of users accessing them grows. These loads create both CPU and I/O bottlenecks. One promising solution already being employed to eliminate the CPU bottleneck is to replace a single processor server with a cluster of servers. Our goal in this paper is to develop buffer management algorithms that exploit the aggregate memory capacity of the machines in such a server cluster to attack the I/O bottleneck. The key challenge in designing such buffer management algorithms turns out to be controlling data replication so as to achieve a good balance between intra-cluster network traffic and disk I/O. At one extreme, the straightforward application of client-server memory management techniques to this cluster architecture causes duplication in memory among the servers and this tends to reduce network traffic but increases disk I/O, whereas at the other extreme, eliminating all duplicates tends to increase network traffic while reducing disk I/O. Accordingly, we present a new algorithm, called Hybrid, that dynamically controls the amount of duplication. Through a detailed simulation, we show that, on workloads that are characteristic of those experienced by Web servers, the Hybrid algorithm correctly trades off intra-cluster network traffic and disk I/O to minimize average response time. Shivakumar Venkataraman, Miron Livny, Jeffrey F. Naughton |
ICDE | 1 |
| 1996 | Parallelising OODBMS Traversals: A Performance Evaluation
David J. DeWitt, Jeffrey F. Naughton, John C. Shafer, Shivakumar Venkataraman |
VLDB J. | 4 |
| 1995 | The Impact of Data Placement on Memory Management for Multi-Server OODBMSabstractWe demonstrate the close relationship between data placement and memory management for symmetric multi-server OODBMS. We propose and investigate memory management algorithms for two data placement strategies, namely declustering and clustering. Through a detailed simulation, we show that by declustering the data most of the benefits of complex global memory management algorithms are realized by simple algorithms. In contrast we show that when data is clustered, the simple algorithms perform poorly.> Shivakumar Venkataraman, Miron Livny, Jeffrey F. Naughton |
ICDE | 1 |
| 1994 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID ArchitectureabstractTraditional disk arrays have a centralized architecture, with a single controller through which all requests flow. Such a controller is a single point of failure, and its performance limits the maximum number of disks to which the array can scale. We describe TickerTAIP, a parallel architecture for disk arrays that distributes the controller functions across several loosely coupled processors. The result is better scalability, fault tolerance, and flexibility. This article presents the TickerTAIP architecture and an evaluation of its behavior. We demonstrate the feasibility by a working example, describe a family of distributed algorithms for calculating RAID parity, discuss techniques for establishing request atomicity, sequencing, and recovery, and evaluate the performance of the TickerTAIP design in both absolute terms and by comparison to a centralized RAID implementation. We also analyze the effects of including disk-level request-scheduling algorithms inside the array. We conclude that the Ticker TAIP architectural approach is feasible, useful, and effective. Swee Boon Lim, Shivakumar Venkataraman, John Wilkes |
ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. | 3 |
| 1993 | The TickerTAIP Parallel RAID ArchitectureabstractTraditional disk arrays have a centralized architecture, with a single controller through which all requests flow. Such a controller is a single point of failure, and its performance limits the maximum size that the array can grow to. We describe here TickerTAIP, a parallel architecture for disk arrays that distributed the controller functions across several loosely-coupled processors. The result is better scalability, fault tolerance, and flexibility. Swee Boon Lim, Shivakumar Venkataraman, John Wilkes |
ISCA | 3 |