Skip to main content

SQL and NoSQL Database Comparison

From Performance Perspective in Supporting Semi-structured Data

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Information and Communication Networks (FICC 2018)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 886))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this digital era, social media web applications have churned out huge amount of unstructured data each day. These social media data may be processed into meaningful data through text analytics. With the rapid growth of the volume of unstructured data produced daily, NoSQL database is increasingly popular that it has become the chosen database to store data. However, little research is done on the comparison of SQL and NoSQL in terms of indexing, performance tuning, and amount of records supported. This paper aims to provide a thorough comparative evaluation of MongoDB and MySQL, a tool for SQL and NoSQL databases, respectively, in terms of their performance in populating and retrieving big data after performance tuning. The findings presented in this paper give a new insight from the aspect of how these databases support semi-structured social media data by considering the options of performance tuning. The methodology for this research consists of four performance measurements, namely, insert, select, update, and delete up to 1 million Twitter data stored, to evaluate SQL and NoSQL databases. Our result findings indicate that MongoDB does perform faster for all the four operations. However, there are more performance tuning options provided by MySQL for more flexible performance optimization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Pervasive Software Inc. 2003. Harvesting Unstructured Data, p. 2

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kaur, M.: Malaysians spend 12 hours daily on phone and online. [Online]. New Straits Times (2015). http://www.nst.com.my/news/2015/12/116437/malaysians-spend-12-hours-daily-phone-and-online. Accessed 20 Oct 2016

  3. Arasu, A., Garcia-Molina, H.: Extracting structured data from web pages. In: SIGMOD 2003: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (2003). Accessed 20 Aug 2017

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sucio, D.: Encyclopedia of Database Systems: Semi-Structured Data Model, p. 144. Springer, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zoulfaghari, R.: SQL server versions in distribution, parallelism and big data. Int. J. Comput. Appl. (0975–8887) 148(14), 1 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gupta, S., Narsimha.: Performance evaluation of NoSQL – cassandra over relational data store – MYSQL for bigdata. Int. J. Technol. 2015 6, 640 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dubois, P., et al.: MySQL 5.0 Certification Study Guide, p. 541 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chodorow, K., Dirolf, M.: MongoDB: The Definitive Guide, p. 7 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Damodaran, D., et al.: Performance Evaluation Of Mysql And MongoDB. Databases Int. J. Cybern. Inf. (IJCI) 5(2) (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Datastax Corporation. The Modern Online application for the Internet economy: 5 Key Requirements that Ensure Success. White paper by Datastax Corporation, Santa Clara, Calif (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Moradi, M., Ghadiri, N.: Performance Evaluation of SQL and MongoDB Databases for Big E-Commerce Data, p. 2 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Twitter Developers. Streaming APIs | Twitter Developer Documentation (2016). https://dev.twitter.com/streaming/overview. Accessed 20 Oct 2016

  13. McKinney, W.: Python for Data Analysis, p. 5. O’Reilly Media Inc. (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Internet Live Stats. 2013. Twitter Usage Statistics. Internet Live Stats. http://www.internetlivestats.com/twitter-statistics/. Accessed 20 Oct 2016

  15. Boicea, A., et al.: MongoDB vs Oracle – database comparison. In: Emerging Intelligent Data and Web Technologies (EIDWT) 2012 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ming-Li Emily Chang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chang, ML.E., Chua, H.N. (2019). SQL and NoSQL Database Comparison. In: Arai, K., Kapoor, S., Bhatia, R. (eds) Advances in Information and Communication Networks. FICC 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 886. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03402-3_20

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics