Are Joins over LSM-trees Ready: Take RocksDB as an Example
Weiping Yu, Fan Wang, Xuwei Zhang, Siqiang Luo
Abstract
LSM-tree-based data stores are widely adopted in industries for their excellent performance. As data scale increases, disk-based join operations become indispensable yet costly for the database, making the selection of suitable join methods crucial for system optimization. Current LSM-based stores generally adhere to conventional relational database practices and support only a limited number of join methods. However, the LSM-tree delivers distinct read and write efficiency compared to the relational databases, which could accordingly impact the performance of various join methods. Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider the selection of join methods in this context to fully explore the potential of various join algorithms and index designs. In this work, we present a systematic study and an exhaustive benchmark for joins over LSM-trees. We define a configuration space for join methods, encompassing various join algorithms, secondary index types, and consistency strategies. We also summarize a theoretical analysis to evaluate the overhead of each join method for an in-depth understanding. Furthermore, we implement all join methods in the configuration space on a unified platform and compare their performance through extensive experiments. Our theoretical and experimental results yield several insights and takeaways tailored to joins in LSM-based stores that aid developers in choosing proper join methods based on their working conditions.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 27806bca-367a-4257-bbbd-be300b99d605Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on19
- An End-to-End Learning-based Cost EstimatorJi Sun, Guoliang LiVLDB 2020 · 251 citations
- Bao: Making Learned Query Optimization PracticalRyan Marcus, Parimarjan Negi, Hongzi Mao, Nesime Tatbul et al.SIGMOD 2021 · 242 citations
- Benchmarking Learned IndexesRyan Marcus, Andreas Kipf, Alexander van Renen, Mihail Stoian et al.VLDB 2021 · 185 citations
- The PGM-index: a fully-dynamic compressed learned index with provable worst-case boundsPaolo Ferragina, Giorgio VinciguerraVLDB 2020 · 178 citations
- From WiscKey to Bourbon: A Learned Index for Log-Structured Merge TreesYifan Dai, Yien Xu, Aishwarya Ganesan, Ramnatthan Alagappan et al.OSDI 2020 · 138 citations
Related papers
- Constructing and Analyzing the LSM Compaction Design SpaceSubhadeep Sarkar, Dimitris Staratzis, Zichen Zhu, Manos AthanassoulisVLDB 2021 · 73 citations
- Structural Designs Meet Optimality: Exploring Optimized LSM-tree Structures in a Colossal Configuration SpaceJunfeng Liu, Fan Wang, Dingheng Mo, Siqiang LuoSIGMOD 2024 · 13 citations
- How to Grow an LSM-tree? Towards Bridging the Gap Between Theory and PracticeDingheng Mo, Siqiang Luo, Stratos IdreosSIGMOD 2025 · 5 citations
- Disco: A Compact Index for LSM-treesWenshao Zhong, Chen Chen, Xingbo Wu, Jakob ErikssonSIGMOD 2025 · 2 citations
- On Performance Stability in LSM-based Storage SystemsChen Luo, Michael J. CareyVLDB 2020 · 1 citation
