Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A latency comparison in a sharded database environment: A study between Vitess-MySQL and CockroachDB
Jönköping University, School of Engineering, JTH, Department of Computer Science and Informatics.
Jönköping University, School of Engineering, JTH, Department of Computer Science and Informatics.
2022 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The world is becoming more and more digitized which in turn puts pressure on existing applications and systems to be able to handle large quantities of data. And  in some cases, that data also needs to be operated in secure and isolated environments. To address these needs, a new category  of databases has emerged, by the name of NewSQL. The downside of this new category is that it still remains unexplored in some areas, such as how each database under that category performs towards each other, or even towards databases belonging to other categories. One major aspect, in terms of performance is latency, since it affects the overall user-experience. In order to clear up some of the unexplored areas within NewSQL, two databases were studied in the context of their latency performance: CockroachDB and Vitess.

The study was divided into two main parts. The first one, was a quantitative study, which was about gathering data on how each database performed in terms of latency when serving the create, read, update, and delete-operations. No clear differences in latency were found for the create- and read-operations. While the results for update- and delete-operations showed significant differences where Vitess had lower latency than CockroachDB. 

The second part of this study was a qualitative study, dedicated to analyze and inspect each database architecture and source code. The intention was to identify potential factors that may affect latency performance. The outcome from the analysis was that three main factors could be identified. The first identified factor is that CockroachDB had a layered architecture and that it needed to translate SQL queries into a set of key-value operations. The second one is that the databases makes use of different storage engines, which in turn can have differences in performance. The third and final identified factor is that MySQL, which was integrated with Vitess, had existed for a longer period of time compared to CockroachDB. Which indicates that the database probably has been more optimized over the years.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2022. , p. 49
Keywords [en]
Architecture Analysis, CockroachDB, Database Management System, Distributed SQL, Latency Comparison, MySQL, NewSQL, Sharding, Source Code Inspection, Vitess
National Category
Computer and Information Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-57937ISRN: JU-JTH-DTA-1-20220169OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-57937DiVA, id: diva2:1682975
External cooperation
Knowit AB
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2022-07-13 Created: 2022-07-13 Last updated: 2025-10-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2279 kB)664 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2279 kBChecksum SHA-512
03ca482e6771c6e37d0273212341951e58b566f06a29a8d8cc576e2ca2afc129c530300c8f5d49465fb8a6d9ea4087cb71257009d3461a9358e962a2896dcaba
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
JTH, Department of Computer Science and Informatics
Computer and Information Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 665 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 2755 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf