skip to main content
article

TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks

Published:01 March 2005Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We discuss the design of an acquisitional query processor for data collection in sensor networks. Acquisitional issues are those that pertain to where, when, and how often data is physically acquired (sampled) and delivered to query processing operators. By focusing on the locations and costs of acquiring data, we are able to significantly reduce power consumption over traditional passive systems that assume the a priori existence of data. We discuss simple extensions to SQL for controlling data acquisition, and show how acquisitional issues influence query optimization, dissemination, and execution. We evaluate these issues in the context of TinyDB, a distributed query processor for smart sensor devices, and show how acquisitional techniques can provide significant reductions in power consumption on our sensor devices.

References

  1. Alonso, R. and Ganguly, S. 1993. Query optimization in mobile environments. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Foundations of Models and Languages for Data and Objects. 1--17.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso, R. and Korth, H. F. 1993. Database system issues in nomadic computing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD (Washington, DC).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Avnur, R. and Hellerstein, J. M. 2000. Eddies: Continuously adaptive query processing. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD (Dallas, TX). 261--272.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bancilhon, F., Briggs, T., Khoshafian, S., and Valduriez, P. 1987. FAD, a powerful and simple database language. In Proceedings of VLDB.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bonnet, P., Gehrke, J., and Seshadri, P. 2001. Towards sensor database systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Mobile Data Management.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Brooke, T. and Burrell, J. 2003. From ethnography to design in a vineyard. In Proceedings of the Design User Experiences (DUX) Conference. Case study.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Carney, D., Centiemel, U., Cherniak, M., Convey, C., Lee, S., Seidman, G., Stonebraker, M., Tatbul, N., and Zdonik, S. 2002. Monitoring streams---a new class of data management applications. In Proceedings of VLDB.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Cerpa, A., Elson, J., D. Estrin, Girod, L., Hamilton, M., and Zhao, J. 2001. Habitat monitoring: Application driver for wireless communications technology. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Data Communications in Latin America and the Caribbean.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Chakrabarti, K., Garofalakis, M., Rastogi, R., and Shim, K. 2001. Approximate query processing using wavelets. VLDB J. 10, 2-3 (Sep.), 199--223.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Chakravarthy, S., Krishnaprasad, V., Anwar, E., and Kim, S. K. 1994. Composite events for active databases: Semantics, contexts and detection. In Proceedings of VLDB.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Chandrasekaran, S., Cooper, O., Deshpande, A., Franklin, M. J., Hellerstein, J. M., Hong, W., Krishnamurthy, S., Madden, S. R., Raman, V., Reiss, F., and Shah, M. A. 2003. TelegraphCQ: Continuous dataflow processing for an uncertain world. In Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Innovative Database Research (CIDR).]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, J., DeWitt, D., Tian, F., and Wang, Y. 2000. NiagaraCQ: A scalable continuous query system for internet databases. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Chen, Z., Gehrke, J., and Korn, F. 2001. Query optimization in compressed database systems. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Crespo, A. and Garcia-Molina, H. 2002. Routing indices for peer-to-peer systems. In Proceedings of ICDCS.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Delin, K. A. and Jackson, S. P. 2000. Sensor web for in situ exploration of gaseous biosignatures. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Dewitt, D. J., Ghandeharizadeh, S., Schneider, D. A., Bricker, A., Hsiao, H. I., and Rasmussen, R. 1990. The gamma database machine project. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2, 1, 44--62.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Ganeriwal, S., Kumar, R., Adlakha, S., and Srivastava, M. 2003. Timing-sync protocol for sensor networks. In Proceedings of ACM SenSys.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Garofalakis, M. and Gibbons, P. 2001. Approximate query processing: Taming the terabytes! (tutorial). In Proceedings of VLDB.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Gay, D., Levis, P., von Behren, R., Welsh, M., Brewer, E., and Culler, D. 2003. The nesC language: A holistic approach to network embedded systems. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2003 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Gehrke, J., Korn, F., and Srivastava, D. 2001. On computing correlated aggregates over continual data streams. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data (Santa Barbara, CA).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Hanson, E. N. 1996. The design and implementation of the ariel active database rule system. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 8, 1 (Feb.), 157--172.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hellerstein, J., Hong, W., Madden, S., and Stanek, K. 2003. Beyond average: Towards sophisticated sensing with queries. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Hellerstein, J. M. 1998. Optimization techniques for queries with expensive methods. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 23, 2, 113--157.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Hellerstein, J. M., Franklin, M. J., Chandrasekaran, S., Deshpande, A., Hildrum, K., Madden, S., Raman, V., and Shah, M. 2000. Adaptive query processing: Technology in evolution. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 23, 2, 7--18.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Hill, J., Szewczyk, R., Woo, A., Hollar, S., and Pister, D. C. K. 2000. System architecture directions for networked sensors. In Proceedings of ASPLOS.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Ibaraki, T. and Kameda, T. 1984. On the optimal nesting order for computing n-relational joins. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 9, 3, 482--502.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Imielinski, T. and Badrinath, B. 1992. Querying in highly mobile distributed environments. In Proceedings of VLDB (Vancouver, B.C., Canada).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Intanagonwiwat, C., Govindan, R., and Estrin, D. 2000. Directed diffusion: A scalable and robust communication paradigm for sensor networks. In Proceedings of MobiCOM (Boston, MA).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Intersema. 2002. MS5534A barometer module. Tech. rep. (Oct.). Go online to http://www.intersema.com/pro/module/file/da5534.pdf.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Ives, Z. G., Florescu, D., Friedman, M., Levy, A., and Weld, D. S. 1999. An adaptive query execution system for data integration. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Kossman, D. 2000. The state of the art in distributed query processing. ACM Comput. Surv. 32, 4 (Dec.), 422--46.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Krishnamurthy, R., Boral, H., and Zaniolo, C. 1986. Optimization of nonrecursive queries. In Proceedings of VLDB. 128--137.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Leopold, M., Dydensborg, M., and Bonnet, P. 2003. Bluetooth and sensor networks: A reality check. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Sensor Networks (SenSys).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Lin, C., Federspiel, C., and Auslander, D. 2002. Multi-sensor single actuator control of HVAC systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference for Enhanced Building Operations (Austin, TX, Oct. 14--18).]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Liu, L., Pu, C., and Tang, W. 1999. Continual queries for internet-scale event-driven information delivery. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. (special Issue on Web technology) 11, 4 (July), 610--628.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Madden, S. 2003. The design and evaluation of a query processing architecture for sensor networks. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Madden, S. and Franklin, M. J. 2002. Fjording the stream: An architechture for queries over streaming sensor data. In Proceedings of ICDE.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Madden, S., Franklin, M. J., Hellerstein, J. M., and Hong, W. 2002a. TAG: A Tiny AGgregation service for ad-hoc sensor networks. In Proceedings of OSDI.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Madden, S., Hong, W., Franklin, M., and Hellerstein, J. M. 2003. TinyDB Web page. Go online to http://telegraph.cs.berkeley.edu/tinydb.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Madden, S., Shah, M. A., Hellerstein, J. M., and Raman, V. 2002b. Continously adaptive continuous queries over data streams. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD (Madison, WI).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Mainwaring, A., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., and Culler, D. 2002. Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. In Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Sensor Networks and Applications.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Melexis, Inc. 2002. MLX90601 infrared thermopile module. Tech. rep. (Aug.). Go online to http://www.melexis.com/prodfiles/mlx90601.pdf.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Monma, C. L. and Sidney, J. 1979. Sequencing with series parallel precedence constraints. Math. Operat. Rese. 4, 215--224.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Motwani, R., Widom, J., Arasu, A., Babcock, B., S.Babu, Data, M., Olston, C., Rosenstein, J., and Varma, R. 2003. Query processing, approximation and resource management in a data stream management system. In Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Innovative Database Research (CIDR).]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Olston, C. and Widom, J. 2002. In best effort cache sychronization with source cooperation. In Proceedings of SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Pirahesh, H., Hellerstein, J. M., and Hasan, W. 1992. Extensible/rule based query rewrite optimization in starburst. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD. 39--48.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Pottie, G. and Kaiser, W. 2000. Wireless integrated network sensors. Commun. ACM 43, 5 (May), 51--58.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Priyantha, N. B., Chakraborty, A., and Balakrishnan, H. 2000. The cricket location-support system. In Proceedings of MOBICOM.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Raman, V., Raman, B., and Hellerstein, J. M. 2002. Online dynamic reordering. VLDB J. 9, 3.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Sensirion. 2002. SHT11/15 relative humidity sensor. Tech. rep. (June). Go online to http://www.sensirion.com/en/pdf/Datasheet_SHT1x_SHT7x_0206.pdf.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Shatdal, A. and Naughton, J. 1995. Adaptive parallel aggregation algorithms. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Stonebraker, M. and Kemnitz, G. 1991. The POSTGRES next-generation database management system. Commun. ACM 34, 10, 78--92.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Sudarshan, S. and Ramakrishnan, R. 1991. Aggregation and relevance in deductive databases. In Proceedings of VLDB. 501--511.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. TAOS, Inc. 2002. TSL2550 ambient light sensor. Tech. rep. (Sep.). Go online to http://www.taosinc.com/images/product/document/tsl2550.pdf.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. UC Berkeley. 2001. Smart buildings admit their faults. Web page. Lab notes: Research from the College of Engineering, UC Berkeley. Go online to http://coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/1101.smartbuildings.html.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Urhan, T., Franklin, M. J., and Amsaleg, L. 1998. Cost-based query scrambling for initial delays. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Wolfson, O., Sistla, A. P., Xu, B., Zhou, J., and Chamberlain, S. 1999. DOMINO: Databases fOr MovINg Objects tracking. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD (Philadelphia, PA).]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Woo, A. and Culler, D. 2001. A transmission control scheme for media access in sensor networks. In Proceedings of ACM Mobicom.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Yao, Y. and Gehrke, J. 2002. The cougar approach to in-network query processing in sensor networks. In SIGMOD Rec. 13, 3 (Sept.), 9--18.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks

            Recommendations

            Reviews

            Lia-Maria Pasculescu

            The acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks described in this paper is a new development in the field of acquisitional query languages. Running on the Berkeley "mote" platform, on top of an operating system called TinyOS, TinyDB is a query processor designed for sensor networks that has control over "where, when and how often data is physically acquired." The discussion starts with a presentation of the sensor devices and their power consumption, the operating system running on these sensor devices (TinyOS), and the communication inside sensor networks. On these sensor devices, on top of TinyOS, there is an acquisitional query language running, called TinyDB, that collects data in the form of sensor tuples. TinyDB uses basic structured query language (SQL) with extensions that deal with the particularities of the sensor devices, mainly the sample period (the time between the moment when the nodes initiate the data collection and transmission in a real-time fashion, and when they stop the transmission). Other extensions to the classic SQL used inside TinyDB concern the aggregation queries, and also event-based queries (where the events are those mechanisms that initiate data collection). The lifetime-based queries will be useful in environmental monitoring scenarios, where scientists are concerned with the duration of the network. The model of TinyDB uses a cost-based optimizer to choose a query plan that will require the lowest degree of power consumption. This is accomplished by the use of a catalog of metadata describing the node's local attributes, events, and user-defined functions. Next, the paper describes the dissemination of the query into the network. The query begins with a broadcast from the root of the network. Each node listens to the query, and must decide if it applies locally, or needs to be further broadcast to its children. This decision is based on a new data structure proposed by the authors: a semantic routing tree. This routing tree allows each node to efficiently determine if its children need to participate in a given query. Finally, the authors present details on query execution, prioritizing data, and adapting sampling and delivery rates. Using techniques like snooping, TinyDB can still transmit the most relevant results when the power or bandwidth is limited. Although the paper is very interesting, and describes the newest techniques in data acquisition and processing, its audience is quite limited; it is mainly intended for those scientists and researchers who implement and supervise battery-powered sensing devices. Online Computing Reviews Service

            Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

            Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            • Published in

              cover image ACM Transactions on Database Systems
              ACM Transactions on Database Systems  Volume 30, Issue 1
              Special Issue: SIGMOD/PODS 2003
              March 2005
              332 pages
              ISSN:0362-5915
              EISSN:1557-4644
              DOI:10.1145/1061318
              Issue’s Table of Contents

              Copyright © 2005 ACM

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 1 March 2005
              Published in tods Volume 30, Issue 1

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • article

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader