Skip to main content

Evaluating Graph Database Systems for Biological Data

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Big Scientific Data Benchmarks, Architecture, and Systems (SDBA 2018)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 911))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 327 Accesses

Abstract

The graph database system can express the complex relationships in the real world through the simple and intuitive description of “entities” and“relationships”. Now, the graph database system is used to analyze complex relationship between entities, especially, in the scientific research field. For example, the RDF-based graph database system has been used for biological data processing. Many previous works have proved that the graph database system is very suite for biological researchers to store and analyze biological data. In this paper, we evaluate two graph database systems (Apache Jena and gStore) by the biological RDF data set, the biological RDF data set contains 10 millions pieces of data on the types of Uniport, Enzyme, Taxonomy and Gen. And we design five query workloads, which are “1-step”,“2-steps(p1)”, “2-steps(p2)”,“union” and “filtering” and one data load workload. The metrics which we evaluated including user-observed metrics (workload execution time), system metrics (CPU utilization, I/O wait ratio and memory bandwith) and micro-architecture metrics (IPC, cache miss and branch misprediction ratio). The experiment results show that gStore performs better in complex query workloads, and Jena is more suitable for the simple ones.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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. De Virgilio, R., Rombo, S.E.: Approximate matching over biological RDF graphs. 1413–1414 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Consortium U P: UniProt: a hub for protein information. Nucleic Acids Res. 43(Database issue), 204–212 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. UniProt Consortium: UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 45(D1), D158–D169 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Duan, S., Kementsietsidis, A., Srinivas, K., et al.: Apples and oranges: a comparison of RDF benchmarks and real RDF datasets. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 145-156. ACM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Prud’Hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL query language for RDF, W3C Recommendation (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zou, L., Özsu, M.T., Chen, L., et al.: gStore: a graph-based SPARQL query engine. VLDB J. Int. J. Very Large Data Bases 23(4), 565–590 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zeng, L., Zou, L.: Redesign of the gStore system. Front. Comput. Sci. 2, 1–19 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  8. https://perf.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page

  9. Wang, L., et al.: Bigdatabench: a big data benchmark suite from internet services. In: 2014 IEEE 20th International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA). IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zheng, C., Zhan, J., Jia, Z., et al.: Characterizing OS behaviors of datacenter and big data workloads. In: 2016 IEEE 18th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 14th International Conference on Smart City; IEEE 2nd International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS), pp. 1079-1086. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jia, Z., Zhan, J., Wang, L., et al.: Characterizing and subsetting big data workloads. In: 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Workload Characterization (IISWC), pp. 191–201. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gao, W., Zhan, J., Wang, L., et al.: Data Motifs: A Lens Towards Fully Understanding Big Data and AI Workloads. IEEE Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gao, W., Zhan, J., Wang, L., et al.: Data Motif-based Proxy Benchmarks for Big Data and AI Workloads. IISWC (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jia, Z., Zhan, J., Wang, L., et al.: Understanding big data analytics workloads on modern processors. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 28(6), 1797–1810 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by the National Key Research and Development Plan of China (Grant No.2016YFB1000600 and 2016YFB1000601).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minghe Yu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yu, M., Zang, Y., Dai, S., Zheng, D., Li, J. (2019). Evaluating Graph Database Systems for Biological Data. In: Ren, R., Zheng, C., Zhan, J. (eds) Big Scientific Data Benchmarks, Architecture, and Systems. SDBA 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 911. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5910-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5910-1_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5909-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5910-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics