Dictionaries remain the most well studied class of data structures. A dictionary supports insertions, deletions, membership queries, and usually successor, predecessor, and extract-min. In a RAM, all such operations take O(log n) time on n elements.
Dictionaries are often cross-referenced as follows. Consider a set of tuples {〈ai,bi,ci…〉}. A database might include more than one dictionary on such a set, for example, one indexed on the a ‘s, another on the b‘s, and so on. Once again, in a RAM, inserting into a set of L cross-referenced dictionaries takes O(L log n) time, as does deleting.
The situation is more interesting in external memory. On a Disk Access Machine (DAM), B-trees achieve O(logB N) I/Os for insertions and deletions on a single dictionary and K-element range queries take optimal O(logB N + K/B) I/Os. These bounds are also achievable by a B-tree on cross-referenced dictionaries, with a slowdown of an L factor on insertion and deletions.
In recent years, both the theory and practice of external- memory dictionaries has been revolutionized by write- optimization techniques. A dictionary is write optimized if it is close to a B-tree for query time while beating B-trees on insertions. The best (and optimal) dictionaries achieve a substantially improved insertion and deletion cost of amortized I/Os on a single dictionary while maintaining optimal O(log1+B∊ N + K/B)- I/O range queries.
Although write optimization still helps for insertions into cross-referenced dictionaries, its value for deletions would seem to be greatly reduced. A deletion into a cross- referenced dictionary only specifies a key a. It seems to be necessary to look up the associated values b, c … in order to delete them from the other dictionaries. This takes Ω(logB N) I/Os, well above the per-dictionary write-optimization budget of So the total deletion cost is
In short, for deletions, write optimization offers an advantage over B-trees in that L multiplies a lower order term, but when L = 2, write optimization seems to offer no asymptotic advantage over B-trees. That is, no known query- optimal solution for pairs of cross-referenced dictionaries seem to beat B-trees for deletions.
In this paper, we show a lower bound establishing that a pair of cross-referenced dictionaries that are optimal for range queries and that supports deletions cannot match the write optimization bound available to insert-only dictionaries.
This result thus establishes a limit to the applicability of write-optimization techniques on which many new databases and file systems are based.
Read More: http://epubs.siam.org/doi/10.1137/1.9781611974782.99
more »
« less
Write-Optimized Skip Lists
The skip list is an elegant dictionary data structure that is com- monly deployed in RAM. A skip list with N elements supports searches, inserts, and deletes in O(logN) operations with high probability (w.h.p.) and range queries returning K elements in O(log N + K) operations w.h.p.
A seemingly natural way to generalize the skip list to external memory with block size B is to “promote” with probability 1/B, rather than 1/2. However, there are practical and theoretical obsta- cles to getting the skip list to retain its efficient performance, space bounds, and high-probability guarantees.
We give an external-memory skip list that achieves write- optimized bounds. That is, for 0 < ε < 1, range queries take O(logBε N + K/B) I/Os w.h.p. and insertions and deletions take O((logBε N)/B1−ε) amortized I/Os w.h.p.
Our write-optimized skip list inherits the virtue of simplicity from RAM skip lists. Moreover, it matches or beats the asymptotic bounds of prior write-optimized data structures such as Bε trees or LSM trees. These data structures are deployed in high-performance databases and file systems.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1637458
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10027800
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- PODS '17 Proceedings of the 36th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
In the unit-cost comparison model, a black box takes an input two items and outputs the result of the comparison. Problems like sorting and searching have been studied in this model, and it has been general- ized to include the concept of priced information, where different pairs of items (say database records) have different comparison costs. These comparison costs can be arbitrary (in which case no algorithm can be close to optimal (Charikar et al. STOC 2000)), structured (for exam- ple, the comparison cost may depend on the length of the databases (Gupta et al. FOCS 2001)), or stochastic (Angelov et al. LATIN 2008). Motivated by the database setting where the cost depends on the sizes of the items, we consider the problems of sorting and batched predecessor where two non-uniform sets of items A and B are given as input. (1) In the RAM setting, we consider the scenario where both sets have n keys each. The cost to compare two items in A is a, to compare an item of A to an item of B is b, and to compare two items in B is c. We give upper and lower bounds for the case a ≤ b ≤ c, the case that serves as a warmup for the generalization to the external-memory model. Notice that the case b = 1,a = c = ∞ is the famous “nuts and bolts” problem. ) In the Disk-Access Model (DAM), where transferring elements between disk and internal memory is the main bottleneck, we con- sider the scenario where elements in B are larger than elements in A. The larger items take more I/Os to be brought into memory, consume more space in internal memory, and are required in their entirety for comparisons. A key observation is that the complexity of sorting depends heavily on the interleaving of the small and large items in the final sorted order. If all large elements come after all small elements in the final sorted order, sorting each type separately and concatenating is optimal. However, if the set of predecessors of B in A has size k ≪ n, one must solve an associated batched predecessor problem in order to achieve optimality. We first give output-sensitive lower and upper bounds on the batched predecessor problem, and use these to derive bounds on the complexity of sorting in the two models. Our bounds are tight in most cases, and require novel generalizations of the classical lower bound techniques in external memory to accommodate the non-uniformity of keys.more » « less
-
In-memory data management systems, such as key-value stores, have become an essential infrastructure in today's big-data processing and cloud computing. They rely on efficient index structures to access data. While unordered indexes, such as hash tables, can perform point search with O(1) time, they cannot be used in many scenarios where range queries must be supported. Many ordered indexes, such as B+ tree and skip list, have a O(log N) lookup cost, where N is number of keys in an index. For an ordered index hosting billions of keys, it may take more than 30 key-comparisons in a lookup, which is an order of magnitude more expensive than that on a hash table. With availability of large memory and fast network in today's data centers, this O(log N) time is taking a heavy toll on applications that rely on ordered indexes. In this paper we introduce a new ordered index structure, named Wormhole, that takes O(log L) worst-case time for looking up a key with a length of L. The low cost is achieved by simultaneously leveraging strengths of three indexing structures, namely hash table, prefix tree, and B+ tree, to orchestrate a single fast ordered index. Wormhole's range operations can be performed by a linear scan of a list after an initial lookup. This improvement of access efficiency does not come at a price of compromised space efficiency. Instead, Wormhole's index space is comparable to those of B+ tree and skip list. Experiment results show that Wormhole outperforms skip list, B+ tree, ART, and Masstree by up to 8.4x, 4.9x, 4.3x, and 6.6x in terms of key lookup throughput, respectively.more » « less
-
A data structure A is said to be dynamically optimal over a class of data structures C if A is constant- competitive with every data structure C ∈ C. Much of the research on binary search trees in the past forty years has focused on studying dynamic optimality over the class of binary search trees that are modified via rotations (and indeed, the question of whether splay trees are dynamically optimal has gained notoriety as the so-called dynamic-optimality conjecture). Recently, researchers have extended this to consider dynamic optimality over certain classes of external-memory search trees. In particular, Demaine, Iacono, Koumoutsos, and Langerman propose a class of external-memory trees that support a notion of tree rotations, and then give an elegant data structure, called the Belga B-tree, that is within an O(log log N )-factor of being dynamically optimal over this class. In this paper, we revisit the question of how dynamic optimality should be defined in external memory. A defining characteristic of external-memory data structures is that there is a stark asymmetry between queries and inserts/updates/deletes: by making the former slightly asymptotically slower, one can make the latter significantly asymptotically faster (even allowing for operations with sub-constant amortized I/Os). This asymmetry makes it so that rotation-based search trees are not optimal (or even close to optimal) in insert/update/delete-heavy external-memory workloads. To study dynamic optimality for such workloads, one must consider a different class of data structures. The natural class of data structures to consider are what we call buffered-propagation trees. Such trees can adapt dynamically to the locality properties of an input sequence in order to optimize the interactions between different inserts/updates/deletes and queries. We also present a new form of beyond-worst-case analysis that allows for us to formally study a continuum between static and dynamic optimality. Finally, we give a novel data structure, called the Jεllo Tree, that is statically optimal and that achieves dynamic optimality for a large natural class of inputs defined by our beyond-worst-case analysis.more » « less
-
more » « less
The ranked (or top-
k ) document retrieval problem is defined as follows: preprocess a collection{T1,T2,… ,Td} ofd strings (called documents) of total lengthn into a data structure, such that for any given query(P,k) , whereP is a string (called pattern) of lengthp ≥ 1 andk ∈ [1,d] is an integer, the identifiers of thosek documents that are most relevant toP can be reported, ideally in the sorted order of their relevance. The seminal work by Hon et al. [FOCS 2009 and Journal of the ACM 2014] presented anO(n) -space (in words) data structure withO(p+k logk) query time. The query time was later improved toO(p+k) [SODA 2012] and further toO(p/ logσn+k) [SIAM Journal on Computing 2017] by Navarro and Nekrich, whereσ is the alphabet size. We revisit this problem in the external memory model and present three data structures. The first one takesO(n) -space and answer queries inO(p/B + logBn + k/B+ log*(n/B) ) I/Os, whereB is the block size. The second one takesO(n log*(n/B) ) space and answer queries in optimalO(p/B + logBn + k/B) I/Os. In both cases, the answers are reported in the unsorted order of relevance. To handle sorted top-k document retrieval, we present anO(n log(d/B)) space data structure with optimal query cost.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3034786.3056117
