Advertisement

Which XML Storage for Knowledge and Ontology Systems?

  • Martin Bukatovič
  • Aleš Horák
  • Adam Rambousek
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6276)

Abstract

New research concerning knowledge and ontology management systems in many cases need the versatility of native XML storage for manipulations with diverse and changing data structures. Within the DEB (Dictionary Editor and Browser) development platform, the efficiency of the background data storage for all kinds of structures and services including dictionaries, wordnet semantic networks, classical ontologies or lexical databases, tends to be a crucial property of the system.

In this paper, we describe a large set of tests that were run on four selected (out of twenty) available XML database systems, where the tests were run with the aim to recommend the best XML database for knowledge and ontology storage.

Keywords

Equality Query Ontology System Dictionary Writing System eXist Database Ontology Storage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Chaudhri, A.B., Rashid, A., Zicari, R. (eds.): XML Data Management: Native XML and XML-Enabled Database Systems. Addison Wesley Professional, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krishnamurthy, R., Kaushik, R., Naughton, J.: XML-to-SQL query translation literature: The state of the art and open problems. In: Bellahsène, Z., Chaudhri, A.B., Rahm, E., Rys, M., Unland, R. (eds.) XSym 2003. LNCS, vol. 2824, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Horák, A., Pala, K., Rambousek, A., Rychlý, P.: New clients for dictionary writing on the DEB platform. In: DWS 2006: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Dictionary Writings Systems, Italy, pp. 17–23. Lexical Computing Ltd, U.K (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Horák, A., Pala, K., Rambousek, A., Povolný, M.: First version of new client-server wordnet browsing and editing tool. In: Proceedings of the Third International WordNet Conference - GWC 2006, Jeju, South Korea, Masaryk University, Brno, pp. 325–328 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Böhme, T., Rahm, E.: Multi-user evaluation of XML data management systems with XMach-1. Efficiency and Effectiveness of XML Tools and Techniques and Data Integration over the Web, 148–159 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nambiar, U., Lacroix, Z., Bressan, S., Lee, M., Li, Y.: Efficient XML data management: an analysis. E-Commerce and Web Technologies, 261–266 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lu, H., Yu, J., Wang, G., Zheng, S., Jiang, H., Yu, G., Zhou, A.: What makes the differences: benchmarking XML database implementations. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT) 5(1), 154–194 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nicola, M., Kogan, I., Schiefer, B.: An XML transaction processing benchmark. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pp. 937–948. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meier, W., et al.: eXist: An open source native XML database. LNCS, pp. 169–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foundation, A.S.: Apache Lucene (2006), http://lucene.apache.org
  11. 11.
    Boncz, P., Grust, T., van Keulen, M., Manegold, S., Rittinger, J., Teubner, J.: MonetDB/XQuery: a fast XQuery processor powered by a relational engine. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, p. 490. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W3C: XQuery Update Facility 1.0 (2009), http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-update-10
  13. 13.
    Hiemstra, D., Rode, H., van Os, R., Flokstra, J.: PF/Tijah: text search in an XML database system. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Open Source Information Retrieval (OSIR), pp. 12–17 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fomichev, A., Grinev, M., Kuznetsov, S.: Sedna: A Native XML DBMS. In: Wiedermann, J., Tel, G., Pokorný, J., Bieliková, M., Štuller, J. (eds.) SOFSEM 2006. LNCS, vol. 3831, p. 272. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    CWI: XMark – An XML Benchmark Project (2009), http://www.xml-benchmark.org
  16. 16.
    Schenkel, R., Suchanek, F., Kasneci, G.: YAWN: A semantically annotated Wikipedia XML corpus. In: Datenbanksysteme in Business, Technologie und Web (BTW 2007), Aachen, Germany, Verlagshaus Mainz, pp. 277–291 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Bukatovič
    • 1
  • Aleš Horák
    • 1
  • Adam Rambousek
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of InformaticsMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations