Generating Shifting Workloads to Benchmark Adaptability in Relational Database Systems

1. Zilio, D.C., Rao, J., Lightstone, S., Lohman, G.M., Storm, A.J., Garcia-Arellano, C., Fadden, S.: Db2 design advisor: Integrated automatic physical database design. In: VLDB 2004: Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 1087–1097. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)

   Google Scholar 

2. Dageville, B., Das, D., Dias, K., Yagoub, K., Zaït, M., Ziauddin, M.: Automatic sql tuning in oracle 10g. In: VDLB 2004: Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 1098–1109. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)

   Google Scholar 

3. Agrawal, S., Chaudhuri, S., Kollár, L., Marathe, A.P., Narasayya, V.R., Syamala, M.: Database tuning advisor for microsoft sql server 2005. In: VDLB 2004: Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 1110–1121. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)

   Google Scholar 

4. Bruno, N., Chaudhuri, S.: An online approach to physical design tuning. In: ICDE 2007: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering, pp. 826–835. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2007)

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

5. Wiese, D., Rabinovitch, G., Reichert, M., Arenswald, S.: Autonomic tuning expert: a framework for best-practice oriented autonomic database tuning. In: CASCON 2008: Proceedings of the 2008 conference of the center for advanced studies on collaborative research, pp. 27–41. ACM, New York (2008)

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

6. Nambiar, R.O., Poess, M.: The making of tpc-ds. In: VLDB 2006: Proceedings of the 32nd international conference on Very large data bases, pp. 1049–1058 (2006)

   Google Scholar 

7. Poess, M.: Controlled sql query evolution for decision support benchmarks. In: WSOP 2007: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Software and Performance, pp. 38–41. ACM, New York (2007)

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

8. Hsu, W.W., Smith, A.J., Young, H.C.: Characteristics of production database workloads and the tpc benchmarks. IBM Systems Journal 40(3), 781–802 (2001)

   Article  Google Scholar 

9. Agrawal, S., Chu, E., Narasayya, V.: Automatic physical design tuning: Workload as a sequence. In: SIGMOD 2006: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pp. 683–694. ACM, New York (2006)

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

10. Holze, M., Ritter, N.: Autonomic databases: Detection of workload shifts with n-gram-models. In: Atzeni, P., Caplinskas, A., Jaakkola, H. (eds.) ADBIS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5207, pp. 127–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

11. Consens, M.P., Barbosa, D., Teisanu, A.M., Mignet, L.: Goals and benchmarks for autonomic configuration recommenders. In: SIGMOD 2005: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 239–250. ACM, New York (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

12. Rabl, T., Pfeffer, M., Kosch, H.: Dynamic allocation in a self-scaling cluster database. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 20(17), 2025–2038 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

13. Mitzenmacher, M.: A brief history of generative models for power law and lognormal distributions. Internet Mathematics 1(2), 226–251 (2004)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

14. Chen, P.P.S.: The entity-relationship model — toward a unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 1(1), 9–36 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

15. Stephens, J.M., Poess, M.: Mudd: a multi-dimensional data generator. In: WOSP 2004: Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Software and performance, pp. 104–109. ACM, New York (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

16. Fuchs, E., Gruber, C., Reitmaier, T., Sick, B.: Processing short-term and long-term information with a combination of polynomial approximation techniques and time-delay neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks (2009) (accepted – to appear)

    Google Scholar 

17. Fuchs, E., Gruber, T., Nitschke, J., Sick, B.: On-line motif detection in time series with SwiftMotif. Pattern Recognition 42(11), 3015–3031 (2009)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

18. Elhay, S., Golub, G.H., Kautsky, J.: Updating and downdating of orthogonal polynomials with data fitting applications. SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 12(2), 327–353 (1991)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

19. Fuchs, E.: On discrete polynomial least-squares approximation in moving time windows. In: Gautschi, W., Golub, G., Opfer, G. (eds.) Applications and Computation of Orthogonal Polynomials. International Series of Numerical Mathematics, vol. 131, pp. 93–107. Birkhäuser, Basel (1999); (Proceedings of the Conference at the Mathematical Research Institute Oberwolfach, Germany, March 22-28 1998)

    Google Scholar 

20. Bishop, C.M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, New York (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

21. Blackburn, S.M., McKinley, K.S., Garner, R., Hoffmann, C., Khan, A.M., Bentzur, R., Diwan, A., Feinberg, D., Frampton, D., Guyer, S.Z., Hirzel, M., Hosking, A.L., Jump, M., Lee, H., Moss, J.E.B., Phansalkar, A., Stefanovic, D., Van Drunen, T., von Dincklage, D., Wiedermann, B.: Wake up and smell the coffee: evaluation methodology for the 21st century. Communications of the ACM 51(8), 83–89 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

22. Bruno, N.: A critical look at the tab benchmark for physical design tools. SIGMOD Record 36(4), 7–12 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

23. Poess, M., Nambiar, R.O., Walrath, D.: Why you should run tpc-ds: A workload analysis. In: VLDB 2007: Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on Very large data bases, pp. 1138–1149. VLDB Endowment (2007)

    Google Scholar 

24. Poess, M., Nambiar, R.O.: Energy cost, the key challenge of today’s data centers: A power consumption analysis of tpc-c results. Proceedings of VLDB Endowment 1(2), 1229–1240 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references