Advertisement

Abstract

With the emergence of XML as a standard for representing business data, new decision support applications are being developed. These XML data warehouses aim at supporting On-Line Analytical Processing (OLAP) operations that manipulate irregular XML data. To ensure feasibility of these new tools, important performance issues must be addressed. Performance is customarily assessed with the help of benchmarks. However, decision support benchmarks do not currently support XML features. In this paper, we introduce the XML Warehouse Benchmark (XWeB), which aims at filling this gap. XWeB derives from the relational decision support benchmark TPC-H. It is mainly composed of a test data warehouse that is based on a unified reference model for XML warehouses and that features XML-specific structures, and its associate XQuery decision support workload. XWeB’s usage is illustrated by experiments on several XML database management systems.

Keywords

benchmark XML data warehouse OLAP TPC-H 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Afanasiev, L., Manolescu, I., Michiels, P.: MemBeR: A Micro-benchmark Repository for XQuery. In: Bressan, S., Ceri, S., Hunt, E., Ives, Z.G., Bellahsène, Z., Rys, M., Unland, R. (eds.) XSym 2005. LNCS, vol. 3671, pp. 144–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beyer, K.S., Chamberlin, D.D., Colby, L.S., Özcan, F., Pirahesh, H., Xu, Y.: Extending XQuery for Analytics. In: 2005 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD 2005, Baltimore, USA, pp. 503–514 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boag, S., Chamberlin, D., Fernández, M., Florescu, D., Robie, J., Siméon, J.: XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language (2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/
  4. 4.
    Böhme, T., Rahm, E.: Multi-user Evaluation of XML Data Management Systems with XMach-1. In: Bressan, S., Chaudhri, A.B., Li Lee, M., Yu, J.X., Lacroix, Z. (eds.) CAiSE 2002 and VLDB 2002. LNCS, vol. 2590, pp. 148–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bressan, S., Lee, M.L., Li, Y.G., Lacroix, Z., Nambiar, U.: The XOO7 Benchmark. In: Bressan, S., Chaudhri, A.B., Li Lee, M., Yu, J.X., Lacroix, Z. (eds.) CAiSE 2002 and VLDB 2002. LNCS, vol. 2590, pp. 146–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chamberlin, D., Dyck, M., Florescu, D., Melton, J., Robie, J., Siméon, J.: XQuery Update Facility 1.0 (2009), http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-update-10/
  7. 7.
    Darmont, J., Bentayeb, F., Boussaid, O.: Benchmarking data warehouses. International Journal of Business Intelligence and Data Mining 2(1), 79–104 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gray, J.: The Benchmark Handbook for Database and Transaction Processing Systems, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hachicha, M., Mahboubi, H., Darmont, J.: Expressing OLAP operators with the TAX XML algebra. In: 3rd International Workshop on Database Technologies for Handling XML Information on the Web, EDBT/DataX 2008, Nantes, France (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hümmer, W., Bauer, A., Harde, G.: XCube: XML for data warehouses. In: 6th International Workshop on Data Warehousing and OLAP, DOLAP 2003, New Orleans, USA, pp. 33–40 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kimball, R., Ross, M.: The Data Warehouse Toolkit: The Complete Guide to Dimensional Modeling, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kit, C., Amagasa, T., Kitagawa, H.: Algorithms for structure-based grouping in XML-OLAP. International Journal of Web Information Systems 5(2), 122–150 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mahboubi, H., Darmont, J.: Benchmarking XML data warehouses. In: 1st Workshop on Decisional Systems, MCSEAI/ASD 2006, Agadir, Morocco (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mahboubi, H., Ralaivao, J.C., Loudcher, S., Boussaid, O., Bentayeb, F., Darmont, J.: X-WACoDa: An XML-based approach for Warehousing and Analyzing Complex Data. In: Advances in Data Warehousing and Mining, pp. 38–54. IGI (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OLAP Council: APB-1 OLAP Benchmark Release II (1998), http://www.olapcouncil.org
  16. 16.
    O’Neil, P., O’Neil, E., Chen, X., Revilak, S.: The Star Schema Benchmark and Augmented Fact Table Indexing. In: Nambiar, R., Poess, M. (eds.) TPCTC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5895, pp. 237–252. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pokorný, J.: XML Data Warehouse: Modelling and Querying. In: 5th International Baltic Conference (BalticDB&IS 2002), Tallin, Estonia, pp. 267–280 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rizzi, S.: Conceptual Modeling Solutions for the Data Warehouse. In: Data Warehouses and OLAP: Concepts, Architectures and Solutions, pp. 1–26. IRM Press, Hershey (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Runapongsa, K., Patel, J.M., Jagadish, H.V., Chen, Y., Al-Khalifa, S.: The Michigan benchmark: towards XML query performance diagnostics. Information Systems 31(2), 73–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schmidt, A., Waas, F., Kersten, M.L., Carey, M.J., Manolescu, I., Busse, R.: Assessing XML Data Management with XMark. In: Bressan, S., Chaudhri, A.B., Li Lee, M., Yu, J.X., Lacroix, Z. (eds.) CAiSE 2002 and VLDB 2002. LNCS, vol. 2590, pp. 144–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simitsis, A., Vassiliadis, P., Dayal, U., Karagiannis, A., Tziovara, V.: Benchmarking ETL Workflows. In: Nambiar, R., Poess, M. (eds.) TPCTC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5895, pp. 199–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thomsen, E.: Comparing different approaches to OLAP calculations as revealed in benchmarks. Intelligence Enterprise’s Database Programming & Design (1998), http://www.dbpd.com/vault/9805desc.htm
  23. 23.
    Torlone, R.: Conceptual Multidimensional Models. In: Multidimensional Databases: Problems and Solutions, pp. 69–90. IDEA, USA (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Transaction Processing Performance Council: TPC Benchmark DS (Decision Support) Draft Specification revision 32 (2005), http://www.tpc.org/tpcds/
  25. 25.
    Transaction Processing Performance Council: TPC Benchmark H Standard Specification Revision 2.8.0 (2008), http://www.tpc.org/tpch/
  26. 26.
    Wiwatwattana, N., Jagadish, H.V., Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Srivastava, D.: X ∧ 3: A Cube Operator for XML OLAP. In: 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2007, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 916–925 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wyatt, L., Caufield, B., Pol, D.: Principles for an ETL Benchmark. In: Nambiar, R., Poess, M. (eds.) TPCTC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5895, pp. 183–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yao, B.B., Özsu, M.T., Khandelwal, N.: XBench Benchmark and Performance Testing of XML DBMSs. In: 20th International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2004, Boston, USA, pp. 621–633 (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhang, J., Wang, W., Liu, H., Zhang, S.: X-warehouse: building query pattern-driven data. In: 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2005, Chiba, Japan, pp. 896–897 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hadj Mahboubi
    • 1
  • Jérôme Darmont
    • 2
  1. 1.CEMAGREF Clermont-FerrandFrance
  2. 2.Université de Lyon (ERIC Lyon 2)France

Personalised recommendations