Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Self-Management Technology in Databases

  • Surajit Chaudhuri
  • Gerhard Weikum
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_334

Synonyms

Auto-administration and auto-tuning of database systems; Autonomic database systems; Self-managing database systems; Self-tuning database systems

Definition

The total cost of ownership (TCO) for a database-centric information system is dominated by the expenses for highly skilled human staff in order to deploy, configure, administer, monitor, and tune the database system. Self-management technology for databases aims to automate these tasks to the largest possible extent and throughout the entire life cycle of the information system. This involves many dimensions that determine the system performance and availability such as workload analysis, capacity planning, physical database design, database statistics management for query optimization, load control, memory management, system-health monitoring, failure diagnosis and root-cause identification, configuration of backup procedures, and other self-healing capabilities. The self-managing capabilities can be incorporated in a...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Lazowska ED, Zahorjan J, Scott GG, Sevcik KC. Quantitative system performance: computer analysis using queuing network models. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Finkelstein SJ, Scholnick M, Tiberio P. Physical database design for relational databases. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1988;13(1):91–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weikum G, Hasse C, Moenkeberg A, Zabback P. The COMFORT automatic tuning project. Inf Syst. 1994;19(5):381–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weikum G, Moenkeberg A, Hasse C, Zabback P. Self-tuning database technology and information services: from Wishful thinking to viable engineering. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown KP, Mehta M, Carey MJ, Livny M. Towards automated performance tuning for complex workloads. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reiner DS, Pinkerton TB. A method for adaptive performance improvement of operating systems. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles; 1981.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chaudhuri S, König AC, Narasayya VR. SQLCM: a continuous monitoring framework for relational database engines. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Data Engineering; 2004.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaudhuri S, Narasayya V, Syamala M. Bridging the application and DBMS profiling divide for database application developers. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2007.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chaudhuri S, Weikum G. Rethinking database system architecture: towards a self-tuning RISC-style database system. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ailamaki A, editor. Special issue on self-managing database systems. IEEE Data Eng Bull 2006; 29(3):1–62.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Menasce DA, Almeida VAF. Capacity planning for web performance. Metrics, models and methods. Upper Saddle Rive: Prentice-Hall; 2001.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bruno N, Chaudhuri S. To tune or not to tune? A lightweight physical design alerter. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2006. p. 499–510.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Diao Y, Hellerstein JL, Parekh SS, Griffith R, Kaiser GE, Phung DB. A control theory foundation for self-managing computing systems. IEEE J Select Areas Commun. 2005;23(12):2213–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jiang N, Villafane R, Hua KA, Sawant A, Prabhakara K. ADMiRe: an algebraic data mining approach to system performance analysis. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2005;17(7):888–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stillger M, Lohman GM, Markl V, Kandil M. LEO – DB2’s learning optimizer. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2001.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chaudhuri S, Narasayya V. Self-tuning database systems: a decade of progress. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Candea G, Brown AB, Fox A, Patterson DA. Recovery-oriented computing: building multitier dependability. IEEE Comput. 2004;37(11):60–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wilkes J, Golding RA, Staelin C, Sullivan T. The HP AutoRAID hierarchical storage system. ACM Trans Comput Syst. 1996;14(1):108–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chaudhuri S, Narasayya VR. An efficient cost-driven index selection tool for Microsoft SQL server. In: Proceedings of the 23th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lightstone S. Seven software engineering principles for autonomic computing development. Innov Syst Softw Eng. 2007;3(1):71–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Microsoft ResearchMicrosoft CorporationRedmondUSA
  2. 2.Department 5: Databases and Information SystemsMax-Planck-Institut für InformatikSaarbrückenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Surajit Chaudhuri
    • 1
  1. 1.Microsoft ResearchMicrosoft CorporationRedmondUSA