1 / 38

B-Trees, Part 2 Hash-Based Indexes

B-Trees, Part 2 Hash-Based Indexes. R&G Chapter 10 Lecture 10. Administrivia. The new Homework 3 now available Due 1 week from Sunday Homework 4 available the week after Midterm exams available here. Review. Last time discussed File Organization Unordered heap files Sorted Files

marcia-wade
Download Presentation

B-Trees, Part 2 Hash-Based Indexes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. B-Trees, Part 2Hash-Based Indexes R&G Chapter 10 Lecture 10

  2. Administrivia • The new Homework 3 now available • Due 1 week from Sunday • Homework 4 available the week after • Midterm exams available here

  3. Review • Last time discussed File Organization • Unordered heap files • Sorted Files • Clustered Trees • Unclustered Trees • Unclustered Hash Tables • Indexes • B-Trees – dynamic, good for changing data, range queries • Hash tables – fastest for equality queries, useless for range queries

  4. Review (2) • For any index, 3 alternatives for data entries k*: • Data record with key value k • <k, rid of data record with search key value k> • <k, list of rids of data records with search key k> • Choice orthogonal to the indexing technique

  5. Today: • Indexes • Composite Keys, Index-Only Plans • B-Trees • details of insertion and deletion • Hash Indexes • How to implement with changing data sets

  6. Inserting a Data Entry into a B+ Tree • Find correct leaf L. • Put data entry onto L. • If L has enough space, done! • Else, must splitL (into L and a new node L2) • Redistribute entries evenly, copy upmiddle key. • Insert index entry pointing to L2 into parent of L. • This can happen recursively • To split index node, redistribute entries evenly, but push upmiddle key. (Contrast with leaf splits.) • Splits “grow” tree; root split increases height. • Tree growth: gets wider or one level taller at top.

  7. Indexes with Composite Search Keys Examples of composite key indexes using lexicographic order. • Composite Search Keys: Search on a combination of fields. • Equality query: Every field value is equal to a constant value. E.g. wrt <sal,age> index: • age=20 and sal =75 • Range query: Some field value is not a constant. E.g.: • age =20; or age=20 and sal > 10 • Data entries in index sorted by search key to support range queries. • Lexicographic order, or • Spatial order. 11,80 11 12 12,10 name age sal 12,20 12 13,75 bob 12 10 13 <age, sal> cal 11 80 <age> joe 12 20 10,12 sue 13 75 10 20 20,12 Data records sorted by name 75,13 75 80,11 80 <sal, age> <sal> Data entries in index sorted by <sal,age> Data entries sorted by <sal>

  8. Composite Search Keys • To retrieve Emp records with age=30 ANDsal=4000, an index on <age,sal> would be better than an index on age or an index on sal. • Choice of index key orthogonal to clustering etc. • If condition is: 20<age<30 AND 3000<sal<5000: • Clustered tree index on <age,sal> or <sal,age> is best. • If condition is: age=30 AND 3000<sal<5000: • Clustered <age,sal> index much better than <sal,age> index! • Composite indexes are larger, updated more often.

  9. SELECT D.mgr FROM Dept D, Emp E WHERE D.dno=E.dno Index-Only Plans <E.dno> SELECT D.mgr, E.eid FROM Dept D, Emp E WHERE D.dno=E.dno <E.dno,E.eid> • A number of queries can be answered without retrieving any tuples from one or more of the relations involved if a suitable index is available. Tree index! SELECT E.dno, COUNT(*) FROM Emp E GROUP BY E.dno <E.dno> SELECT E.dno, MIN(E.sal) FROM Emp E GROUP BY E.dno <E.dno,E.sal> Tree index! <E. age,E.sal> or <E.sal, E.age> SELECTAVG(E.sal) FROM Emp E WHERE E.age=25 AND E.sal BETWEEN 3000 AND 5000 Tree!

  10. Index-Only Plans (Contd.) SELECT E.dno, COUNT (*) FROM Emp E WHERE E.age=30 GROUP BY E.dno • Index-only plans are possible if the key is <dno,age> or we have a tree index with key <age,dno> • Which is better? • What if we consider the second query? SELECT E.dno, COUNT (*) FROM Emp E WHERE E.age>30 GROUP BY E.dno

  11. B-Trees: Insertion and Deletion • Insertion • Find leaf where new record belongs • If leaf is full, redistribute* • If siblings too full, split, copy middle key up • If index too full, redistribute* • If index siblings full, split, push middle key up • Deletion • Find leaf where record exists, remove it • If leaf is less than 50% empty, redistribute* • If siblings too empty, merge, remove key above • If index node above too empty, redistribute* • If index siblings too empty, merge, move above key down

  12. B-Trees: For Homework 2 • Insertion • Find leaf where new record belongs • If leaf is full, redistribute* • If siblings too full, split, copy middle key up • If index too full, redistribute* • If index siblings full, split, push middle key up • Deletion • Find leaf where record exists, remove it • If leaf is less than 50% empty, redistribute* • If siblings too empty, merge, remove key above • If index node above too empty, redistribute* • If index siblings too empty, merge, move above key down This means that after deletion, nodes will often be < 50% full

  13. B-Trees: For Homework 2 (cont) • Splits • When splitting nodes, choose the middle key • If there are even number of keys, choose middle • Your code must Handle Duplicate Keys • We promise that there will never be more than 1 page of duplicate values. • Thus, when splitting, if the middle key is identical to the key to the left, you must find the closest splittable key to the middle.

  14. B-Tree Demo

  15. Hashing • Static and dynamic hashing techniques exist; trade-offs based on data change over time • Static Hashing • Good if data never changes • Extendable Hashing • Uses directory to handle changing data • Linear Hashing • Avoids directory, usually faster

  16. Static Hashing • # primary pages fixed, allocated sequentially, never de-allocated; overflow pages if needed. • h(k) mod N = bucket to which data entry withkey k belongs. (N = # of buckets) 0 h(key) mod N 2 key h N-1 Primary bucket pages Overflow pages

  17. Static Hashing (Contd.) • Buckets contain data entries. • Hash fn works on search key field of record r. Must distribute values over range 0 ... N-1. • h(key) = (a * key + b) usually works well. • a and b are constants; lots known about how to tune h. • Long overflow chains can develop and degrade performance. • Extendible and LinearHashing: Dynamic techniques to fix this problem.

  18. Extendible Hashing • Situation: Bucket (primary page) becomes full. • Why not re-organize file by doubling # of buckets? • Reading and writing all pages is expensive! • Idea: Use directory of pointers to buckets, • double # of buckets by doubling the directory, • splitting just the bucket that overflowed! • Directory much smaller than file, doubling much cheaper. • Nooverflowpages! • Trick lies in how hash function is adjusted!

  19. Extendible Hashing Details • Need directory with pointer to each bucket • Need hash function to incrementally double range • can just use increasingly more LSBs of h(key) • Must keep track of global “depth” • how many times directory doubled so far • Must keep track of local “depth” • how many time each bucket has been split

  20. LOCAL DEPTH 2 Bucket A 16* 4* 12* 32* Example GLOBAL DEPTH 2 2 Bucket B 00 5* 1* 21* 13* 01 • Directory is array of size 4. • To find bucket for r, take last `global depth’ # bits of h(r); we denote r by h(r). • If h(r) = 5 = binary 101, it is in bucket pointed to by 01. 2 10 Bucket C 10* 11 2 DIRECTORY Bucket D 15* 7* 19* DATA PAGES • Insert: If bucket is full, splitit (allocate new page, re-distribute). • If necessary, double the directory. (As we will see, splitting a • bucket does not always require doubling; we can tell by • comparing global depth with local depth for the split bucket.)

  21. Insert h(r)=20 (Causes Doubling) 2 LOCAL DEPTH 3 LOCAL DEPTH Bucket A 4* 12* 32* 16* 32* 16* GLOBAL DEPTH Bucket A GLOBAL DEPTH 2 2 2 3 Bucket B 5* 21* 13* 1* 00 1* 5* 21* 13* 000 Bucket B 01 001 2 10 2 010 Bucket C 10* 11 10* Bucket C 011 100 2 2 DIRECTORY 101 Bucket D 15* 7* 19* 15* 7* 19* Bucket D 110 111 3 DIRECTORY 12* 20* Bucket A2 4* (`split image' of Bucket A)

  22. Now Insert h(r)=9 (Causes Split Only) 3 3 LOCAL DEPTH LOCAL DEPTH 32* 32* 16* 16* Bucket A Bucket A GLOBAL DEPTH GLOBAL DEPTH 2 3 3 3 1* 5* 21* 13* 1* 9* 000 000 Bucket B Bucket B 001 001 2 2 010 010 10* 10* Bucket C Bucket C 011 011 100 100 2 2 101 101 15* 15* 7* 7* 19* 19* Bucket D Bucket D 110 110 111 111 3 3 DIRECTORY 12* 12* 20* 20* Bucket A2 Bucket A2 4* 4* (`split image' DIRECTORY of Bucket A) 3 5* 21* 13* Bucket B2

  23. Points to Note • 20 = binary 10100. Last 2 bits (00) tell us r belongs in A or A2. Last 3 bits needed to tell which. • Global depth of directory: Max # of bits needed to tell which bucket an entry belongs to. • Local depth of a bucket: # of bits used to determine if splitting bucket will also double directory • When does bucket split cause directory doubling? • If, before insert, local depth of bucket = global depth. • Insert causes local depth to become > global depth; • directory is doubled by copying it over and `fixing’ pointer to split image page. • (Use of least significant bits enables efficient doubling via copying of directory!)

  24. Directory Doubling • Why use least significant bits in directory? • Allows for doubling via copying! 2 2 3 16* 4* 12* 32* 16* 4* 12* 32* 000 2 2 2 001 5* 1* 21* 13* 010 00 5* 1* 21* 13* 011 01 2 2 100 10 10* 10* 11 101 110 2 2 111 15* 7* 19* 15* 7* 19*

  25. Deletion • Delete: If removal of data entry makes bucket empty, can be merged with `split image’. If each directory element points to same bucket as its split image, can halve directory. 2 1 16* 16* 4* 12* 32* 4* 12* 32* 2 2 2 2 Delete 10 00 00 5* 5* 1* 21* 13* 1* 21* 13* 01 01 2 10 10 10* 11 11 2 2 15* 15*

  26. Deletion (cont) • Delete: If removal of data entry makes bucket empty, can be merged with `split image’. If each directory element points to same bucket as its split image, can halve directory. 1 2 16* 4* 12* 32* 00 1 16* 4* 12* 32* 01 Delete 15 1 10 5* 1* 21* 13* 2 2 11 00 5* 1* 21* 13* 01 10 1 1 11 16* 4* 12* 32* 0 1 2 1 15* 5* 1* 21* 13*

  27. Comments on Extendible Hashing • If directory fits in memory, equality search answered with one disk access; else two. • 100MB file, 100 bytes/rec, 4K pages contains 1,000,000 records (as data entries) and 25,000 directory elements; chances are high that directory will fit in memory. • Directory grows in spurts, and, if the distribution of hash values is skewed, directory can grow large. • Biggest problem: • Multiple entries with same hash value cause problems! • If bucket already full of same hash value, will keep doubling forever! So must use overflow buckets if dups.

  28. Linear Hashing • This is another dynamic hashing scheme, an alternative to Extendible Hashing. • LH handles the problem of long overflow chains without using a directory, and handles duplicates. • Idea: Use a family of hash functions h0, h1, h2, ... • hi(key) = h(key) mod(2iN); N = initial # buckets • h is some hash function (range is not 0 to N-1) • If N = 2d0, for some d0, hi consists of applying h and looking at the last di bits, where di = d0 + i. • hi+1 doubles the range of hi (similar to directory doubling)

  29. Linear Hashing Example • Let’s start with N = 4 Buckets • Start at “round” 0, “next” 0, have 2round buckets • Each time any bucket fills, split “next” bucket • If (O ≤ hround(key) < Next), use hround+1(key) instead Start Add 9 Next 16* 16* 4* 12* 32* 32* Add 20 9* 5* 5* 1* 21* 13* Next 1* 21* 13* 16* 32* 10* 10* Nround Nround 15* 15* 9* 5* Next 1* 21* 13* 4* 12* 10* 15* Nround 20* 4* 12*

  30. Linear Hashing Example (cont) • Overflow chains do exist, but eventually get split • Instead of doubling, new buckets added one-at-a-time Add 6 Add 17 16* 16* 32* 32* 9* 5* Next 1* 21* 13* 1* 13* 10* 6* 10* 6* Next Nround Nround 15* 15* 4* 12* 20* 4* 12* 20* 5* 21* 9*

  31. Linear Hashing (Contd.) • Directory avoided in LH by using overflow pages, and choosing bucket to split round-robin. • Splitting proceeds in `rounds’. Round ends when all NRinitial (for round R) buckets are split. Buckets 0 to Next-1 have been split; Next to NR yet to be split. • Current round number also called Level. • Search:To find bucket for data entry r, findhround(r): • If hround(r) in range `Next to NR’, r belongs here. • Else, r could be hround(r) or hround(r) + NR; • must apply hround+1(r) to find out.

  32. Overview of LH File • In the middle of a round. Buckets split in this round: Bucket to be split If ( h search key value ) Level Next is in this range, must use h ( search key value ) Level+1 Buckets that existed at the to decide if entry is in beginning of this round: `split image' bucket. this is the range of h Level `split image' buckets: created (through splitting of other buckets) in this round

  33. Linear Hashing (Contd.) • Insert: Find bucket by applying hround / hround+1: • If bucket to insert into is full: • Add overflow page and insert data entry. • (Maybe) Split Next bucket and increment Next. • Can choose any criterion to `trigger’ split. • Since buckets are split round-robin, long overflow chains don’t develop! • Doubling of directory in Extendible Hashing is similar; switching of hash functions is implicit in how the # of bits examined is increased.

  34. Another Example of Linear Hashing • On split, hLevel+1 is used to re-distribute entries. Round=0, N=4 Round=0 PRIMARY h h OVERFLOW h h PRIMARY PAGES 0 0 1 1 PAGES PAGES Next=0 32* 32* 44* 36* 000 00 000 00 Next=1 Data entry r 9* 5* 9* 5* 25* 25* with h(r)=5 001 001 01 01 30* 30* 10* 10* 14* 18* 14* 18* Primary 10 10 010 010 bucket page 31* 35* 7* 31* 35* 7* 11* 11* 43* 011 011 11 11 (This info is for illustration only!) (The actual contents of the linear hashed file) 100 44* 36* 00

  35. Example: End of a Round Round=1 PRIMARY OVERFLOW h h PAGES 0 1 PAGES Next=0 Round=0 00 000 32* PRIMARY OVERFLOW PAGES h PAGES h 1 0 001 01 9* 25* 32* 000 00 10 010 50* 10* 18* 66* 34* 9* 25* 001 01 011 11 35* 11* 43* 66* 10 18* 10* 34* 010 Next=3 100 00 44* 36* 43* 11* 7* 31* 35* 011 11 101 11 5* 29* 37* 44* 36* 100 00 14* 22* 30* 110 10 5* 37* 29* 101 01 14* 30* 22* 31* 7* 11 111 110 10

  36. LH Described as a Variant of EH • The two schemes are actually quite similar: • Begin with an EH index where directory has N elements. • Use overflow pages, split buckets round-robin. • First split is at bucket 0. (Imagine directory being doubled at this point.) But elements <1,N+1>, <2,N+2>, ... are the same. So, need only create directory element N, which differs from 0, now. • When bucket 1 splits, create directory element N+1, etc. • So, directory can double gradually. Also, primary bucket pages are created in order. If they are allocated in sequence too (so that finding i’th is easy), we actually don’t need a directory! Voila, LH.

  37. Summary • Hash-based indexes: best for equality searches, cannot support range searches. • Static Hashing can lead to long overflow chains. • Extendible Hashing avoids overflow pages by splitting a full bucket when a new data entry is to be added to it. (Duplicates may require overflow pages.) • Directory to keep track of buckets, doubles periodically. • Can get large with skewed data; additional I/O if this does not fit in main memory.

  38. Summary (Contd.) • Linear Hashing avoids directory by splitting buckets round-robin, and using overflow pages. • Overflow pages not likely to be long. • Duplicates handled easily. • Space utilization could be lower than Extendible Hashing, since splits not concentrated on `dense’ data areas. • Can tune criterion for triggering splits to trade-off slightly longer chains for better space utilization. • For hash-based indexes, a skewed data distribution is one in which the hash values of data entries are not uniformly distributed!

More Related