Performance evaluation of relational embedded databases: an empirical study

  • Hassan B. Hassan Software Engineering and Embedded Systems (SEES) Research Group, University of Duhok, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2141-0909
  • Qusay I. Sarham Software Engineering and Embedded Systems (SEES) Research Group, Department of Computer Science, College of Science, University of Duhok, Duhok, Kurdistan Region, Iraq https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8708-0063

Resumen

Introduction: With the rapid deployment of embedded databases across a wide range of embedded devices such as mobile devices, Internet of Things (IoT) devices, etc., the amount of data generated by such devices is also growing increasingly. For this reason, the performance is considered as a crucial criterion in the process of selecting the most suitable embedded database management system to be used to store/retrieve data of these devices. Currently, many embedded databases are available to be utilized in this context. Materials and Methods: In this paper, four popular open-source relational embedded databases; namely, H2, HSQLDB, Apache Derby, and SQLite have been compared experimentally with each other to evaluate their operational performance in terms of creating database tables, retrieving data, inserting data, updating data, deleting data. Results and Discussion: The experimental results of this paper have been illustrated in Table 4. Conclusions: The experimental results and analysis showed that HSQLDB outperformed other databases in most evaluation scenarios.

Citas

Deitel P. and Deitel H., Java™ How to Program, 10th Edition, Pearson, 2015.

Sarhan QI, Gawdan IS. Web Applications and Web Services: A Comparative Study. Sci J Univ Zakho [Internet]. 2018;6(1):35-41.. https://doi.org/10.25271/2018.6.1.375

Sarhan QI. Internet of things: a survey of challenges and issues. Int J Internet Things Cyber-Assurance [Internet]. 2018;1(1):40. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJITCA.2018.10011246

Gupta A, Ashraf M. Comparative analysis of encapsulated Java collection framework based on storage attributes. In: International Conference on Computing, Communication & Automation [Internet]. IEEE; 2015. p. 914-7.https://doi.org/10.1109/CCAA.2015.7148506

Oracle Website: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial, accessed 02/09/2018.

Togashi N, Klyuev V. Concurrency in Go and Java: Performance analysis. In: 2014 4th IEEE International Conference on Information Science and Technology [Internet]. IEEE; 2014. p. 213-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIST.2014.6920368.

Das S, Kone V. Ruby under Scanner : Comparison with Java, University of California, technical report, 2010. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8a06/b3a1694b7ee9ac3b2211b7cbc05efc7528ee.pdf

Hundt R. Loop Recognition in C ++ / Java / Go / Scala. Proc Scala Days. 2011;1(1):38-47.

Wendykier P, Borucki B, Nowinski KS. Large Java arrays and their applications. In: 2015 International Conference on High Performance Computing & Simulation (HPCS) [Internet]. IEEE; 2015. p. 460-7. https://doi.org/10.1109/HPCSim.2015.7237077

Costa D, Andrzejak A, Seboek J, Lo D. Empirical Study of Usage and Performance of Java Collections. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/SPEC on International Conference on Performance Engineering - ICPE '17 [Internet]. New York, New York, USA: ACM Press; 2017. p. 389-404. https://doi.org/10.1145/3030207.3030221

Sarhan QI, Gawdan IS. Java Message Service Based Performance Comparison of Apache Activemq and Apache Apollo Brokers. Sci J Univ Zakho. https://doi.org/10.25271/2017.5.4.376

Corral-García J, González-Sánchez J-L, Pérez-Toledano M-Á. Evaluation of Strategies for the Development of Efficient Code for Raspberry Pi Devices. Sensors [Internet]. 2018 Nov 21;18(11):4066. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18114066

Publicado
2018-12-28
Cómo citar
Hassan, H. B., & Sarham, Q. I. (2018). Performance evaluation of relational embedded databases: an empirical study. Revista Innovaciencia , 6(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.15649/2346075X.468
Sección
Artículo de investigación científica y tecnológica