Database Reference
In-Depth Information
4
x 10
4
X−HYBRIDJOIN
HYBRIDJOIN
R−MESHJOIN
MESHJOIN
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
2
4
8
Size of disk relation R on log scale (million tuples)
(a) Performance comparison with
95%
confidence interval
while
M= 50MB
and
R
varies
3.5
x
10
4
X−HYBRIDJOIN
HYBRIDJOIN
R−MESHJOIN
MESHJOIN
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
50
100
150
200
250
Total allocated memory (MB)
(b) Performance comparison with
95%
confidence interval
while
R= 2 million tuples
and
M
varies
Fig. 3.
Performance comparisons
and reduces the memory for the hash table, both these factors are very small
compared to the disk I/O cost.
From the experiments we can see that HYBRIDJOIN performs consistently
slightly better that MESHJOIN and R-MESHJOIN. However, the improvement
is rather modest. Our experiments show that the main performance gain of
