Logo
DeutschClear Cookie - decide language by browser settings
Kriegel, Hans-Peter and Schiwietz, M. and Schneider, Ralf and Seeger, B. (1990): Performance comparison of point and spatial access methods. 1st Smposium on the Design and Implementation of Large Spatial Databases, 17-18 Juli 1989, Santa Barabara, CA.
[img]
Preview

PDF

2MB

Abstract

In the past few years a large number of multidimensional point access methods, also called multiattribute index structures, has been suggested, all of them claiming good performance. Since no performance comparison of these structures under arbitrary (strongly correlated nonuniform, short "ugly") data distributions and under various types of queries has been performed, database researchers and designers were hesitant to use any of these new point access methods. As shown in a recent paper, such point access methods are not only important in traditional database applications. In new applications such as CAD/CIM and geographic or environmental information systems, access methods for spatial objects are needed. As recently shown such access methods are based on point access methods in terms of functionality and performance. Our performance comparison naturally consists of two parts. In part I we w i l l compare multidimensional point access methods, whereas in part I I spatial access methods for rectangles will be compared. In part I we present a survey and classification of existing point access methods. Then we carefully select the following four methods for implementation and performance comparison under seven different data files (distributions) and various types of queries: the 2-level grid file, the BANG file, the hB-tree and a new scheme, called the BUDDY hash tree. We were surprised to see one method to be the clear winner which was the BUDDY hash tree. It exhibits an at least 20 % better average performance than its competitors and is robust under ugly data and queries. In part I I we compare spatial access methods for rectangles. After presenting a survey and classification of existing spatial access methods we carefully selected the following four methods for implementation and performance comparison under six different data files (distributions) and various types of queries: the R-tree, the BANG file, PLOP hashing and the BUDDY hash tree. The result presented two winners: the BANG file and the BUDDY hash tree. This comparison is a first step towards a standardized testbed or benchmark. We offer our data and query files to each designer of a new point or spatial access method such that he can run his implementation in our testbed.