Abstract
Applications using IoT sensory data, such as in Industry 4.0, are a classic example of an organized database. This paper focuses on evaluating three types of DBMS, MongoDB, PostgreSQL using JSON and the relational PostgreSQL, measuring average, jitter, and loss of response Time and achieved throughput. Three scenarios were thoroughly tested, (i) data insertions, (ii) select/find queries, and (iii) queries related to correlation functions. Experimentations concluded that MongoDB is between 19–30% faster than Postgres in the insert queries, achieving 51–55% higher throughput. Additionally, relational Postgres is x4 times faster than MongoDB and x2 times faster than Postgres JSON in the selection queries, achieving 31–35% higher throughput. Finally, the two versions of Postgres performed equally concerning response time in the correlation function queries, while both of them outperformed MongoDB by x3.6 times. Contrariwise, in the correlation function queries, MongoDB achieved 19–24% higher throughput than both versions of Postgres.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Lasi H, Fettke P, Kemper H-G, Feld T, Hoffmann M (2014) Industry 4.0. BISE 6:239–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4
Padovano A, Longo F, Nicoletti L, Mirabelli G (2018) A digital twin based service oriented application for a 4.0 knowledge navigation in the smart factory. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11):631–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.389
Chen B, Wan J, Shu L, Li P, Mukherjee M, Yin B (2018) Smart factory of industry 4.0: key technologies, application case, and challenges. IEEE Acc 6:6505–6519
Hu P (2015) A system architecture for software-defined industrial internet of things. IEEE ICUWB. https://doi.org/10.1109/icuwb.2015.7324414
Yue X, Cai H, Yan H, Zou C, Zhou K (2015) Cloud-assisted industrial cyber-physical systems: an insight, microprocessors and microsystems, 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2015.08.013
Lee J, Bagheri B, Kao HA (2015) A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems. Manuf Lett 3:18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2014.12.001
Makris A, Tserpes K, Spiliopoulos G, Anagnostopoulos D (2019) Performance evaluation of MongoDB and PostgreSQL for spatio-temporal data. In: Workshop proceedings of the EDBT/ICDT (2019)
Mongodb. http://www.mongodb.com/. Accessed on 21 Nov 2021
Binary json. http://bsonspec.org/. Accessed on 21 Nov 2021
Performance Benchmark POSTGRESQL / MONGODB. https://info.enterprisedb.com/rs/069-ALB-339/images/PostgreSQL_MongoDB_Benchmark-WhitepaperFinal.pdf. Accessed on 22 Nov 2021
Cstore. https://citusdata.github.io/cstore_fdw/. Accessed on 26 Nov 2021
Postgres, pg-stat-statement. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/pgstatstatements.html. Accessed on 26 Nov 2021
Plugge E, Hawkins T, Membrey P (2010) The definitive guide to MongoDB: the NoSQL database for cloud and desktop computing, A Press. ISBN-10:1430230517
Matthew N, Stones R (2005) Beginning databases with postgresql: from novice to professional, Apress USA, ISBN: 1590594789
Rossman G (2021) New benchmarks show postgres dominating MongoDB in varied workloads. https://www.enterprisedb.com/news/new-benchmarks-show-postgres-dominating-mongodb-varied-workloads. Accessed on 11 Nov 2021
OnGres. https://ongres.com/. Accessed on 26 Nov 2021
Sysbench. https://github.com/akopytov/sysbench. Accessed on 26 Nov 2021
PostGIS. https://postgis.net/. Accessed on 26 Nov 2021
Klein J, Gorton I, Ernst N, Donohoe P, Pham K, Matser C (2015) Performance evaluation of NoSQL databases: a case study. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. 9781450333382. https://doi.org/10.1145/2694730.2694731
Asiminidis C, Kokkonis G, Kontogiannis S (2018) Database systems performance evaluation for IoT applications. IJDMS 10:1–14. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijdms.2018.10601
Acknowledgements
This research has been co-financed by the European Union and Greek national funds through the Operational Program Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship and Innovation, under the call RESEARCH—CREATE—INNOVATE (project code: T2EDK-00708).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gkamas, T., Karaiskos, V., Kontogiannis, S. (2023). Evaluation of Cloud Databases as a Service for Industrial IoT Data. In: Yang, XS., Sherratt, S., Dey, N., Joshi, A. (eds) Proceedings of Seventh International Congress on Information and Communication Technology. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 464. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2394-4_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2394-4_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-2393-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-2394-4
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)