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

M. Seetha Lakshmi

dblp:90/4297 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 1998
—ORCID · none

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

Systems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 3 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2

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
5 papers
Query processing and optimization · 78% Database system architecture and tuning · 22%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
5 papers
Performance modeling and evaluation · 96% Parallel and multicore computing · 4%

Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Query processing and optimization › selectivity estimation
learned selectivity estimation
0.011998
Selectivity Estimation in Extensible Databases - A Neural Network Approach · VLDB 1998
Query processing and optimization
selectivity estimation
0.011998
Selectivity Estimation in Extensible Databases - A Neural Network Approach · VLDB 1998
Performance modeling and evaluation
analytical modeling
0.031990
Limiting Factors of Join Performance on Parallel Processors · ICDE 1989
A Performance Comparison of Multimicro and Mainframe Database Architectures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Effectiveness of Parallel Joins · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1990
Performance modeling and evaluation
queueing models
0.031990
A Performance Comparison of Multimicro and Mainframe Database Architectures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
The MVA Priority Approximation · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1984
Effectiveness of Parallel Joins · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1990
Query processing and optimization › join processing › join algorithms
hash join
0.011990
Effectiveness of Parallel Joins · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1990
Query processing and optimization › join processing
parallel join
0.011990
Effectiveness of Parallel Joins · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1990
Database system architecture and tuning
extensible database system
0.011998
Selectivity Estimation in Extensible Databases - A Neural Network Approach · VLDB 1998
Database system architecture and tuning › database machine
multiprocessor database machines
0.021988
A Performance Comparison of Multi-Micro and Mainframe Database Architectures · SIGMETRICS 1987
A Performance Comparison of Multimicro and Mainframe Database Architectures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Query processing and optimization
join processing
0.011989
Limiting Factors of Join Performance on Parallel Processors · ICDE 1989
Database system architecture and tuning › database machine
database machine architecture
0.011987
A Performance Comparison of Multi-Micro and Mainframe Database Architectures · SIGMETRICS 1987
Performance modeling and evaluation
benchmarking
0.011987
A Performance Comparison of Multi-Micro and Mainframe Database Architectures · SIGMETRICS 1987
Performance modeling and evaluation › queueing models › mean value analysis
approximate mean value analysis
0.011984
The MVA Priority Approximation · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1984
Performance modeling and evaluation › queueing models › priority queueing
priority queueing networks
0.011984
The MVA Priority Approximation · ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 1984
Performance modeling and evaluation
workload characterization
0.011988
A Performance Comparison of Multimicro and Mainframe Database Architectures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel query processing
0.011987
A Performance Comparison of Multi-Micro and Mainframe Database Architectures · SIGMETRICS 1987

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

neural network · 0.0queueing theory · 0.0analytical modeling · 0.0task time distribution analysis · 0.0analytic modeling · 0.0queueing network model · 0.0parametric performance study · 0.0cost/performance analysis · 0.0cost-performance analysis · 0.0shadow approximation · 0.0mean value analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1998 Selectivity Estimation in Extensible Databases - A Neural Network Approach
M. Seetha Lakshmi, Shaoyu Zhou
VLDB1
1990 Effectiveness of Parallel Joins
abstract
The effectiveness of parallel processing of relational join operations is examined. The skew in the distribution of join attribute values and the stochastic nature of the task processing times are identified as the major factors that can affect the effective exploitation of parallelism. Expressions for the execution time of parallel hash join and semijoin are derived and their effectiveness analyzed. When many small processors are used in the parallel architecture, the skew can result in some processors becoming sources of bottleneck while other processors are being underutilized. Even in the absence of skew, the variations in the processing times of the parallel tasks belonging to a query can lead to high task synchronization delay and impact the maximum speedup achievable through parallel execution. For example, when the task processing time on each processor is exponential with the same mean, the speedup is proportional to P/ln(P) where P is the number of processors. Other factors such as memory size, communication bandwidth, etc., can lead to even lower speedup. These are quantified using analytical models.>
M. Seetha Lakshmi, Philip S. Yu
IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng.1
1989 Limiting Factors of Join Performance on Parallel Processors
abstract
The effectiveness of parallel processing of relational join operations is examined. The skew in the distribution of join attribute values and the stochastic nature of the task processing times are identified as the major factors that can affect the effective utilization of parallelism. When many small processors are used in the parallel architecture, the skew can result in some processors becoming sources of bottleneck while other processors are being under utilized. Even in the absence of skew, the variations in the processing times of the parallel tasks belonging to a query can lead to high task synchronization delay and impact the maximum speedup achievable through parallel execution. Analytic expressions for join execution time are developed for different task time distributions with or without skew.>
M. Seetha Lakshmi, Philip S. Yu
ICDE1
1989 Analysis of Parallel Processing Architectures for Database Systems
M. Seetha Lakshmi, Philip S. Yu
ICPP (1)1
1988 A Performance Comparison of Multimicro and Mainframe Database Architectures
abstract
The performance of a hypothetical multiprocessor back-end database machine is compared to that of a mainframe database system. The hypothetical database machine uses standard microprocessors and disks as well as processors and disks projected to be available in the future. The class of workloads considered is high-volume transaction processing. Analytic queueing models of the two architectures are constructed and used in parametric performance studies. The performance sensitivities with respect to transactions complexity, the amount of overhead required to implement the distributed database function, the amount of skew in the data access pattern, and the buffer miss ratio are determined.>
Philip Heidelberger, M. Seetha Lakshmi
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2
1987 A Performance Comparison of Multi-Micro and Mainframe Database Architectures
abstract
Database machine architectures consisting of multiple microprocessors or mini-computers are attracting wide attention. There have been several proposals and prototypes (see, e.g., DeWitt, Gerber, Graefe, Heytens, Kumar and Muralikrishna (1986), Fishman, Lai and Wilkinson (1984), Hsiao (1983), or the 1983 and 1985 Proceedings of the International Workshop on Database Machines). There is also a commercially available system based on multiple microprocessors (Teradata (1984)). With these architectures it is possible to exploit parallelism at three levels: within a single query, within a single transaction, and by simultaneously executing multiple independent transactions. The rationale behind these multiple microprocessor architectures is primarily to take advantage of the potential lower cost per MIPS (Millions of Instructions per Second, a measure of processing power) of microprocessors as opposed to mainframes. In addition, database machines may offer incremental capacity growth as well as improved performance for large queries by exploiting parallelism within a single query. However, it is not clear if database machines made of multiple microprocessors indeed have any cost/performance advantage over a more conventional mainframe based database management systems. Several papers on the performance analysis of database machines can be found in the literature (e.g., Salza, Terranova and Velardi (1983) or Bit and Hartman (1985)). Most of these studies have focused on determining the execution time of a single query in a particular database machine architecture.
Philip Heidelberger, M. Seetha Lakshmi
SIGMETRICS2
1984 The MVA Priority Approximation
abstract
A Mean Value Analysis (MVA) approximation is presented for computing the average performance measures of closed-, open-, and mixed-type multiclass queuing networks containing Preemptive Resume (PR) and nonpreemptive Head-Of-Line (HOL) priority service centers.The approximation has essentially the same storage and computational requirements as MVA, thus allowing computationally efficient solutions of large priority queuing networks.The accuracy of the MVA approximation is systematically investigated and presented.It is shown that the approximation can compute the average performance measures of priority networks to within an accuracy of 5 percent for a large range of network parameter values.Accuracy of the method is shown to be superior to that of Sevcik's shadow approximation.
Raymond M. Bryant, Anthony E. Krzesinski, M. Seetha Lakshmi, K. Mani Chandy
ACM Trans. Comput. Syst.3