1996•Unpublished venueRequires access

Implementing data cubes efficiently

Venky Harinarayan, Anand Rajaraman, Jeffrey David Ullman

Open publisher page 1,161 citations

Abstract

Decision support applications involve complex queries on very large databases. Since response times should be small, query optimization is critical. Users typically view the data as multidimensional data cubes. Each cell of the data cube is a view consisting of an aggregation of interest, like total sales. The values of many of these cells are dependent on the values of other cells in the data cube..A common and powerful query optimization technique is to materialize some or all of these cells rather than compute them from raw data each time. Commercial systems differ mainly in their approach to materializing the data cube. In this paper, we investigate the issue of which cells (views) to materialize when it is too expensive to materialize all views. A lattice framework is used to express dependencies among views. We present greedy algorithms that work off this lattice and determine a good set of views to materialize. The greedy algorithm performs within a small constant factor of optimal under a variety of models. We then consider the most common case of the hypercube lattice and examine the choice of materialized views for hypercubes in detail, giving some good tradeoffs between the space used and the average time to answer a query. 1

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Decision support applications involve complex queries on very large databases. Since response times should be small, query optimization is critical. Users typically view the data as multidimensional data cubes. Each cell of the data cube is a view consisting of an aggregation of interest, like total sales. The values of many of these cells are dependent on the values of other cells in the data cube..A common and powerful query optimization technique is to materialize some or all of these cells rather than compute them from raw data each time. Commercial systems differ mainly in their approach to materializing the data cube. In this paper, we investigate the issue of which cells (views) to materialize when it is too expensive to materialize all views. A lattice framework is used to express dependencies among views. We present greedy algorithms that work off this lattice and determine a good set of views to materialize. The greedy algorithm performs within a small constant factor of optimal under a variety of models. We then consider the most common case of the hypercube lattice and examine the choice of materialized views for hypercubes in detail, giving some good tradeoffs between the space used and the average time to answer a query. 1

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1161 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Decision support applications involve complex queries on very large databases. Since response times should be small, query optimization is critical. Users typically view the data as multidimensional data cubes. Each cell of the data cube is a view consisting of an aggregation of interest, like total sales. The values of many of these cells are dependent on the values of other cells in the data cube..A common and powerful query optimization technique is to materialize some or all of these cells rather than compute them from raw data each time. Commercial systems differ mainly in their approach to materializing the data cube. In this paper, we investigate the issue of which cells (views) to materialize when it is too expensive to materialize all views. A lattice framework is used to express dependencies among views. We present greedy algorithms that work off this lattice and determine a good set of views to materialize. The greedy algorithm performs within a small constant factor of optimal under a variety of models. We then consider the most common case of the hypercube lattice and examine the choice of materialized views for hypercubes in detail, giving some good tradeoffs between the space used and the average time to answer a query. 1

Key concepts: Hypercube, Computer science, Data cube, Greedy algorithm, Data warehouse, Materialized view, Online analytical processing, Cube (algebra)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Implementing data cubes efficiently — Research Paper | ScholarLens