
handle: 11245/1.192612
Benchmarks belong to the very standard repertory of tools deployed in database development. Assessing the capabilities of a system, analyzing actual and potential bottlenecks, and, naturally, comparing the pros and cons of different systems architectures have become indispensable tasks as databases management systems grow in complexity and capacity. In the course of the development of XML databases the need for a benchmark framework has become more and more evident: a great many different ways to store XML data have been suggested in the past, each with its genuine advantages, disadvantages and consequences that propagate through the layers of a complex database system and need to be carefully considered. The different storage schemes render the query characteristics of the data variably different. However, no conclusive methodology for assessing these differences is available to date.In this paper, we outline desiderata for a benchmark for XML databases drawing from our own experience of developing an XML repository, involvement in the definition of the standard query language, and experience with standard benchmarks for relational databases.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 27 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
