ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Least expected cost query optimization: what can we expect?
Full text PdfPdf (207 KB)
Source Symposium on Principles of Database Systems archive
Proceedings of the twenty-first ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems table of contents
Madison, Wisconsin
SESSION: Research session 9: query processing and optimization II table of contents
Pages: 293 - 302  
Year of Publication: 2002
ISBN:1-58113-507-6
Authors
Francis Chu  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Joseph Halpern  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Johannes Gehrke  Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Sponsors
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
SIGMOD: ACM Special Interest Group on Management of Data
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 3,   Downloads (12 Months): 39,   Citation Count: 10
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/543613.543651
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

A standard assumption in the database query optimization literature is that it suffices to optimize for the "typical" case---that is, the case in which various parameters (e.g., the amount of available memory, the selectivities of predicates, etc.) take on their "typical" values. It was claimed in [CHS99] that we could do better by choosing plans based on their expected cost. Here we investigate this issue more thoroughly. We show that in many circumstances of interest, a "typical" value of the parameter often does give acceptable answers, provided that it is chosen carefully and we are interested only in minimizing expected running time. However, by minimizing the expected running time, we are effectively assuming that if plan p1 runs three times as long as plan p2, then p1 is exactly three times as bad as p2. An assumption like this is not always appropriate. We show that focusing on least expected cost can lead to significant improvement for a number of cost functions of interest.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
 
3
4
 
5
 
6
7
 
8
9
 
10
 
11
{TPPC99} Transaction Processing Performance Council. TPC Benchmark™ H (Decision Support) Standard Specification Revision 1.2.1. Transaction Processing Performance Council, 1999.
 
12

CITED BY  10

Collaborative Colleagues:
Francis Chu: colleagues
Joseph Halpern: colleagues
Johannes Gehrke: colleagues