Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 29, 2025

Utilizing Electroencephalography Measurements for Comparison of Task-Specific Neural Efficiencies: Spatial Intelligence Tasks
Published on: August 9, 2016
A comparative experimental study of distributed storage engines for big spatial data processing using GeoSpark.
Hansub Shin1, Kisung Lee2, Hyuk-Yoon Kwon1
1Department of Industrial Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
This study evaluates distributed storage engines for big spatial data processing with GeoSpark. HDFS and Amazon S3 generally outperform MongoDB, though spatial sharding improves MongoDB performance for large datasets.
Area of Science:
- Computer Science
- Data Engineering
- Geospatial Computing
Background:
- Mobile devices generate vast amounts of spatial data.
- Efficient management of this big spatial data is crucial.
- Existing distributed systems like GeoSpark (Apache Sedona) lack comprehensive storage engine performance studies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the performance of different distributed storage engines for large-scale spatial data processing using GeoSpark.
- To compare HDFS, MongoDB, and Amazon S3 as storage backends for GeoSpark.
- To identify optimal storage solutions for big spatial data.
Main Methods:
- Utilized GeoSpark on Apache Spark for distributed spatial data processing.
- Experimented with HDFS, MongoDB, and Amazon S3 as storage engines.
- Generated large datasets (up to 1 billion records) with varied distributions and sizes.
- Conducted experiments on Amazon EMR cloud instances.
- Analyzed performance based on sharding strategies, caching, data characteristics, and system scale.
Main Results:
- HDFS and Amazon S3 generally outperformed MongoDB for GeoSpark spatial data processing.
- MongoDB performance improved with larger datasets and spatial proximity-based sharding.
- HDFS and S3 demonstrated better scalability with increased executors and storage nodes.
- Caching significantly enhanced overall spatial data processing performance.
- HDFS and S3 exhibited comparable performance across tested environments.
Conclusions:
- Storage engine choice significantly impacts big spatial data processing performance.
- HDFS and Amazon S3 are robust, scalable options for GeoSpark.
- MongoDB can be viable for large-scale data with optimized sharding.
- Caching is a critical factor for optimizing distributed spatial data processing.
More Related Videos
09:43Databases to Efficiently Manage Medium Sized, Low Velocity, Multidimensional Data in Tissue Engineering
Published on: November 22, 2019
07:26Executing Complexity-Increasing Queries in Relational MySQL and NoSQL MongoDB and EXist Size-Growing ISO/EN 13606 Standardized EHR Databases
Published on: March 19, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Selected Data About Geographic Locations
GIS Software, Hardware, and Sources of GIS Data
Manipulation and Analysis
Levels of Use of a GIS
Storage
Cluster Sampling Method
To choose a cluster sample, divide the population into clusters (groups) and then randomly select some of the clusters. All the members from these clusters are in the cluster sample. For example, if you randomly sample four departments from your...