Performance Comparison of Graph Representations Which Support Dynamic Graph Updates

TL;DR

This paper evaluates various graph processing frameworks for dynamic graph updates, demonstrating that a custom implementation significantly outperforms existing tools in tasks like loading, cloning, updating, and traversing dynamic graphs.

Contribution

The authors present a custom graph processing implementation that achieves substantial performance improvements over existing frameworks in dynamic graph operations.

Findings

Our implementation outperforms existing frameworks by up to 177x in graph loading.

Significant speedups are observed in graph cloning, deletions, insertions, and traversal tasks.

Performance gains vary depending on the specific operation and framework compared.

Abstract

Research in graph-structured data has grown rapidly due to graphs' ability to represent complex real-world information and capture intricate relationships, particularly as many real-world graphs evolve dynamically through edge/vertex insertions and deletions. This has spurred interest in programming frameworks for managing, maintaining, and processing such dynamic graphs. In this report, we evaluate the performance of PetGraph (Rust), Stanford Network Analysis Platform (SNAP), SuiteSparse:GraphBLAS, cuGraph, Aspen, and our custom implementation in tasks including loading graphs from disk to memory, cloning loaded graphs, applying in-place edge deletions/insertions, and performing a simple iterative graph traversal algorithm. Our implementation demonstrates significant performance improvements: it outperforms PetGraph, SNAP, SuiteSparse:GraphBLAS, cuGraph, and Aspen by factors of 177x, 106x, 76x, 17x, and 3.3x in graph loading; 20x, 235x, 0.24x, 1.3x, and 0x in graph cloning; 141x/45x, 44x/25x, 13x/11x, 28x/34x, and 3.5x/2.2x in edge deletions/insertions; and 67x/63x, 86x/86x, 2.5x/2.6x, 0.25x/0.24x, and 1.3x/1.3x in traversal on updated graphs with deletions/insertions.