Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.5555/1855840.1855844guideproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesConference Proceedingsacm-pubtype
Article

Stout: an adaptive interface to scalable cloud storage

Published: 23 June 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Many of today's applications are delivered as scalable, multi-tier services deployed in large data centers. These services frequently leverage shared, scale-out, key-value storage layers that can deliver low latency under light workloads, but may exhibit significant queuing delay and even dropped requests under high load.
Stout is a system that helps these applications adapt to variation in storage-layer performance by treating scalable key-value storage as a shared resource requiring congestion control. Under light workloads, applications using Stout send requests to the store immediately, minimizing delay. Under heavy workloads, Stout automatically batches the application's requests together before sending them to the store, resulting in higher throughput and preventing queuing delay. We show experimentally that Stout's adaptation algorithm converges to an appropriate batch size for workloads that require the batch size to vary by over two orders of magnitude. Compared to a non-adaptive strategy optimized for throughput, Stout delivers over 34× lower latency under light workloads; compared to a non-adaptive strategy optimized for latency, Stout can scale to over 3× as many requests.

References

[1]
A. Adya, W. J. Bolosky, R. Chaiken, J. R. Douceur, J. Howell, and J. Lorch. Load management in a large-scale decentralized file system. Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-60, Microsoft Research, July 2004.
[2]
A. Adya, J. Dunagan, and A. Wolman. Centrifuge: Integrated Lease Management and Partitioning for Cloud Services. In Proceedings of USENIX NSDI, Apr. 2010.
[3]
Azure Storage. http://www.microsoft.com/azure/ windowsazure.mspx.
[4]
H. Balakrishnan and R. Katz. Explicit Loss Notification and Wireless Web Performance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom Internet Mini-Conference, 1998.
[5]
L. S. Brakmo, S. W. O'Malley, and L. L. Peterson. TCP Vegas: New techniques for congestion detection and avoidance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pages 24-35, Aug. 1994.
[6]
M. Castro and B. Liskov. Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance. In Proceedings of USENIX OSDI, 1999.
[7]
F. Chang, J. Dean, S. Ghemawat, W. C. Hsieh, D. A. Wallach, M. Burrows, T. Chandra, A. Fikes, and R. E. Gruber. Bigtable: A distributed storage system for structured data. In Proceedings of USENIX OSDI, Nov. 2006.
[8]
J. S. Chase, D. C. Andersen, P. N. Thakar, A. Vahdat, and R. P. Doyle. Managing energy and server resources in hosting centres. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 103-116, Oct. 2001.
[9]
C. M. Chen and N. Roussopoulos. Adaptive database buffer allocation using query feedback. In Proceedings of VLDB, pages 342-353, Aug. 1993.
[10]
J. Dean and S. Ghemawat. MapReduce: Simplified Data Processing on Large Clusters. In Proceedings of USENIX OSDI, Dec. 2004.
[11]
G. DeCandia, D. Hastorun, M. Jampani, G. Kakulapati, A. Lakshman, A. Pilchin, S. Sivasubramanian, P. Vosshall, and W. Vogels. Dynamo: Amazon's highly available key-value store. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 205-220, Oct. 2007.
[12]
Disable SATA Write Caching. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811392.
[13]
C. Frost, M. Mammarella, E. Kohler, A. de los Reyes, S. Hovsepian, A. Matsuoka, and L. Zhang. Generalized file system dependencies. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 307-320, Oct. 2007.
[14]
G. R. Ganger and Y. N. Patt. Metadata update performance in file systems. In Proceedings of USENIX OSDI, pages 49-60, Nov. 1994.
[15]
Google. Google Apps: Gmail, Calendar, Docs and more. http://apps.google.com.
[16]
R. Hagmann. Reimplementing the Cedar file system using logging and group commit. SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, 21(5):155-162, 1987.
[17]
P. Helland, H. Sammer, J. Lyon, R. Carr, P. Garrett, and A. Reuter. Group Commit Timers and High Volume Transaction Systems. In Proceedings of High Performance Transaction Systems, pages 301-329, 1989.
[18]
Y.-C. Ho. On centralized optimal control. IEEE Transactins on Automatic Control, 50(4):537-538, 2005.
[19]
Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com.
[20]
M. Isard, M. Budiu, Y. Yu, A. Birrell, and D. Fetterly. Dryad: Distributed data-parallel programs from sequential building blocks. In Proceedings of ACM EuroSys, Mar. 2007.
[21]
V. Jacobson. Congestion avoidance and control. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pages 314-329, Aug. 1988.
[22]
R. Jain, D. M. Chiu, and W. Hawe. A quantitative measure of fairness and discrimination for resource allocation in shared computer systems. Technical Report TR-301, Digital Equipment Corp., Sept. 1984.
[23]
C. Karamanolis, M. Karlsson, and X. Zhu. Designing controllable computer systems. In Proceedings of USENIX HOTOS, 2005.
[24]
T. Kelly. Scalable TCP: improving performance in highspeed wide area networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, 33(2):83-91, 2003.
[25]
A. Kuzmanovic. The Power of Explicit Congestion Notification. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pages 61-72, Aug. 2005.
[26]
W. Lin, M. Yang, L. Zhang, and L. Zhou. PacificA: Replication in log-based distributed storage systems. Technical Report MSR-TR-2008-25, Microsoft Research, 2008.
[27]
Live Mesh. http://www.mesh.com.
[28]
J. N. Matthews, D. Roselli, A. M. Costello, R. Y. Wang, and T. E. Anderson. Improving the performance of log-structured file systems with adaptive methods. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 238-251, Oct. 1997.
[29]
Microsoft. Office Web Applications. http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/ Features/2008/oct08/10-28PDCOffice.mspx.
[30]
Microsoft. SQL Data Services. http://www.microsoft.com/azure/data.mspx.
[31]
M. Moshayedi and P. Wilkison. Enterprise SSDs. ACM Queue, 2008.
[32]
A. Muthitacharoen, B. Chen, and D. Mazieres. A Low-bandwidth Network File System. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 174-187. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2001.
[33]
E. B. Nightingale, K. Veeraraghavan, P. M. Chen, and J. Flinn. Rethink the sync. In Proceedings of USENIX OSDI, pages 1-14, Nov. 2006.
[34]
P. Padala, K. Shin, X. Zhu, M. Uysal, Z. Wang, S. Singhal, A. Merchant, and K. Salem. Adaptive control of virtualized resources in utility computing environments. In Proceedings of ACM EuroSys, pages 289-302, Mar. 2007.
[35]
M. Rosenblum and J. K. Ousterhout. The design and implementation of a log-structured file system. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 10(1):26-52, 1992.
[36]
M. Satyanarayanan, H. H. Mashburn, P. Kumar, D. C. Steere, and J. J. Kistler. Lightweight recoverable virtual memory. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 12(1):146-160, Feb. 1994.
[37]
K. Tan, J. Song, Q. Zhang, and M. Sridharan. A compound TCP approach for high-speed and long distance networks. In Proceedings of IEEE Infocom, pages 1-12, Apr. 2006.
[38]
C. Tang, S. Tara, R. Chang, and C. Zhang. Black-Box Performance Control for High-Volume Non-Interactive Systems. In Proceedings of USENIX ATC, June 2009.
[39]
C. A. Thekkath, T. Mann, and E. K. Lee. Frangipani: A scalable distributed file system. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 224-237, Oct. 1997.
[40]
W. Vogels. File system usage in Windows NT 4.0. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 93-109, Dec. 1999.
[41]
D. Wei, C. Jin, S. Low, and S. Hegde. FAST TCP: motivation, architecture, algorithms, performance. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), 14(6):1246-1259, 2006.
[42]
M. Welsh, D. E. Culler, and E. A. Brewer. SEDA: An architecture for well-conditioned, scalable internet services. In Proceedings of ACM SOSP, pages 230-243, Oct. 2001.
[43]
L. Xu, K. Harfoush, and I. Rhee. Binary increase congestion control (BIC) for fast long-distance networks. In Proceedings of INFOCOM, Mar. 2004.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Guide Proceedings
USENIXATC'10: Proceedings of the 2010 USENIX conference on USENIX annual technical conference
June 2010
24 pages

Publisher

USENIX Association

United States

Publication History

Published: 23 June 2010

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 06 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2018)IronProceedings of the 15th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation10.5555/3307441.3307468(313-328)Online publication date: 9-Apr-2018
  • (2018)NBWGuardProceedings of the 19th International Middleware Conference Industry10.1145/3284028.3284033(32-38)Online publication date: 10-Dec-2018
  • (2018)dCatProceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference10.1145/3190508.3190555(1-13)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2018
  • (2017)Data Storage Management in Cloud EnvironmentsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/313662350:6(1-51)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2017
  • (2016)MaglevProceedings of the 13th Usenix Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation10.5555/2930611.2930645(523-535)Online publication date: 16-Mar-2016
  • (2016)PSLOProceedings of the Eleventh European Conference on Computer Systems10.1145/2901318.2901330(1-14)Online publication date: 18-Apr-2016
  • (2016)On Throughput-Delay Optimal Access to Storage Clouds via Load Adaptive Coding and ChunkingIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2015.245783424:4(2168-2181)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2016
  • (2015)C3Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation10.5555/2789770.2789806(513-527)Online publication date: 4-May-2015
  • (2014)Fast cloudIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2013.228938222:6(2012-2025)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2014
  • (2013)DepSkyACM Transactions on Storage10.1145/25359299:4(1-33)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2013
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media