pith. sign in

arxiv: 1012.1632 · v1 · pith:2EZ64CENnew · submitted 2010-12-07 · 💻 cs.DB

Benchmarking triple stores with biological data

classification 💻 cs.DB
keywords timeresponseperformancequeriesstorestoresbenchmarkingbiological
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We have compared the performance of five non-commercial triple stores, Virtuoso-open source, Jena SDB, Jena TDB, SWIFT-OWLIM and 4Store. We examined three performance aspects: the query execution time, scalability and run-to-run reproducibility. The queries we chose addressed different ontological or biological topics, and we obtained evidence that individual store performance was quite query specific. We identified three groups of queries displaying similar behavior across the different stores: 1) relatively short response time, 2) moderate response time and 3) relatively long response time. OWLIM proved to be a winner in the first group, 4Store in the second and Virtuoso in the third. Our benchmarking showed Virtuoso to be a very balanced performer - its response time was better than average for all the 24 queries; it showed a very good scalability and a reasonable run-to-run reproducibility.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.