  Range queries over multidimensional data are an important part of database
workloads in many applications. Their execution may be accelerated by using
multidimensional index structures (MDIS), such as kd-trees or R-trees. As for
most index structures, the usefulness of this approach depends on the
selectivity of the queries, and common wisdom told that a simple scan beats
MDIS for queries accessing more than 15%-20% of a dataset. However, this wisdom
is largely based on evaluations that are almost two decades old, performed on
data being held on disks, applying IO-optimized data structures, and using
single-core systems. The question is whether this rule of thumb still holds
when multidimensional range queries (MDRQ) are performed on modern
architectures with large main memories holding all data, multi-core CPUs and
data-parallel instruction sets. In this paper, we study the question whether
and how much modern hardware influences the performance ratio between index
structures and scans for MDRQ. To this end, we conservatively adapted three
popular MDIS, namely the R*-tree, the kd-tree, and the VA-file, to exploit
features of modern servers and compared their performance to different flavors
of parallel scans using multiple (synthetic and real-world) analytical
workloads over multiple (synthetic and real-world) datasets of varying size,
dimensionality, and skew. We find that all approaches benefit considerably from
using main memory and parallelization, yet to varying degrees. Our evaluation
indicates that, on current machines, scanning should be favored over parallel
versions of classical MDIS even for very selective queries.
