skip to main content
10.1145/3337821.3337826acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicppConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

TEA: A Traffic-efficient Erasure-coded Archival Scheme for In-memory Stores

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 August 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

To achieve good trade-off between access performance and memory efficiency, it is appropriate to adopt replication and erasure coding to keep popular and unpopular in-memory datasets, respectively. An issue of redundancy transition from replication to erasure coding (a.k.a., erasure-coded archival) should be addressed for unpopular in-memory datasets, since caching workloads exhibit long-tail distributions and most in-memory data are unpopular.

In this paper, we propose an encoding-oriented replica placement policy - ERP - by incorporating an interleaved declustering mechanism, and design a traffic-efficient erasure-coded archival schemes - TEA - for ERP-powered in-memory stores. With ERP in place, TEA embraces three salient features: (i) it alleviates cross-rack traffic raised by retrieving data-block replicas, (ii) it improves rack-level load balancing by distributing replicas via load-aware primary-rack-selection approach, and (iii) it mitigates block-relocation operations launched to sustain rack-level fault-tolerance. The empirical results show that TEA not only brings forth lower cross-rack traffic than four candidate encoding schemes, but also exhibits superb archival-throughput and rack-level-balancing performance. In particular, TEA accelerates archival throughput by at least 70.8%; and improves rack-level load-balancing by a factor of more than 1.58x relative to the four competitors.

References

  1. Faraz Ahmad, Srimat T Chakradhar, and Anand Raghunathan. 2014. Shuffle-Watcher: Shuffle-aware Scheduling in Multi-tenant MapReduce Clusters.. In Proceeding of the 2014 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (ATC'14). 1--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Werner Almesberger. 2001. Linux Network Traffic Control-Implementation Overview.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Berk Atikoglu, Yuehai Xu, Eitan Frachtenberg, Song Jiang, and Mike Paleczny. 2012. Workload analysis of a large-scale key-value store. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review. ACM, 53--64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Dhruba Borthakur. 2007. The hadoop distributed file system: Architecture and design. Hadoop Project Website 11 (2007), 21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D Borthakur, R Schmidt, R Vadali, S Chen, and P Kling. 2010. HDFS RAID. Technical Talk. Yahoo! Developer Network.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Ruay-Shiung Chang and Hui-Ping Chang. 2008. A dynamic data replication strategy using access-weights in data grids. The Journal of Supercomputing 45, 3 (2008), 277--295. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Yuanqi Chen, Yi Zhou, Shubbhi Taneja, Xiao Qin, and Jianzhong Huang. 2017. aHDFS: An Erasure-Coded Data Archival System for Hadoop Clusters. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 28, 11 (2017), 3060--3073.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Asaf Cidon, Stephen M Rumble, Ryan Stutsman, Sachin Katti, John K Ousterhout, and Mendel Rosenblum. 2013. Copysets: Reducing the Frequency of Data Loss in Cloud Storage.. In Usenix Annual Technical Conference. 37--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Brian F. Cooper, Adam Silberstein, Erwin Tam, and et al. 2010. Benchmarking Cloud Serving Systems with YCSB. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing (SoCC'10). ACM, 143--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. George Copeland and Tom Keller. 1989. A Comparison of High-availability Media Recovery Techniques. In Proceedings of the 1989 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD'89). ACM, 98--109. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. Ford, F. Labelle, F.I. Popovici, and et al. 2010. Availability in Globally Distributed Storage Systems. In Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI'10). USENIX, 61--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. James Lee Hafner. 2005. WEAVER Codes: Highly Fault Tolerant Erasure Codes for Storage Systems. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST'05). USENIX, 211--224. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Li-Yung Ho, Jan-Jan Wu, and Pangfeng Liu. 2011. Optimal algorithms for cross-rack communication optimization in MapReduce framework. In Proceedings of 2011 IEEE International Conference onCloud Computing (CLOUD). IEEE, 420--427. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Jianzhong Huang, Yanqun Wang, Xiao Qin, and Xianhai Liang. 2015. Exploiting pipelined encoding process to boost erasure-coded data archival. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 26, 11 (2015), 2984--2996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. KLab Inc. {n. d.}. Repcached{Online}. http://repcached.lab.klab.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Intel. {n. d.}. Intel® Storage Acceleration Library (Open Source Version). https://goo.gl/zkVl4N.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Runhui Li, Yuchong Hu, and Patrick PC Lee. 2017. Enabling efficient and reliable transition from replication to erasure coding for clustered file systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 28, 9 (2017), 2500--2513.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. MS Manasse, CA Thekkath, and A Silverberg. 2009. A Reed-solomon Code for Disk Storage, and Efficient Recovery Computations for Erasure-coded Disk Storage. Proceeding in Informatics (2009), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Rajesh Nishtala, Hans Fugal, Steven Grimm, and et al. 2013. Scaling Memcache at Facebook.. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI'13), Vol. 13. 385--398. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lluis Pamies-Juarez, Anwitaman Datta, and Frederique Oggier. 2013. RapidRAID: Pipelined erasure codes for fast data archival in distributed storage systems. In Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM'13). IEEE, 1294--1302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. K. V. Rashmi, Mosharaf Chowdhury, Jack Kosaian, and et al. 2016. EC-Cache: Load-Balanced, Low-Latency Cluster Caching with Online Erasure Coding. In Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI'16). USENIX Association, 401--417. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Qaisar Rasool, Jianzhong Li, and Shuo Zhang. 2009. Replica placement in multitier data grid. In 8th IEEE International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing (DASC'09). IEEE, 103--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. T. P. Shabeera and S. D. Madhu Kumar. 2013. Bandwidth-aware data placement scheme for Hadoop. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Recent Advances in Intelligent Computational Systems (RAICS'13). 64--67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Konstantin Taranov, Gustavo Alonso, and Torsten Hoefler. 2018. Fast and strongly-consistent per-item resilience in key-value stores. In Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys'18). ACM, 39--53. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. A Vahdat. 2009. Scale and efficiency in data center networks. UC San Diego (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Hakim Weatherspoon and John D Kubiatowicz. 2002. Erasure Coding vs. Replication: A Quantitative Comparison. In Peer-to-Peer Systems. Springer, 328--337. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Shuzhan Wei, Yongkun Li, Yinlong Xu, and Si Wu. 2017. DSC: Dynamic stripe construction for asynchronous encoding in clustered file system. In IEEE Conf. on Computer Communications (INFOCOM'17). IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Daniel Wind. 2013. Instant Effective Caching with Ehcache. Packt Publishing Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Yanwen Xie, Dan Feng, and Fang Wang. 2017. Non-Sequential Striping for Distributed Storage Systems with Different Redundancy Schemes. In 2017 46th International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP). IEEE, 231--240.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Matt M. T. Yiu, Helen H. W. Chan, and Patrick P. C. Lee. 2017. Erasure Coding for Small Objects in In-memory KV Storage. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM International Systems and Storage Conference (SYSTOR'17). ACM, Article 14, 12 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Heng Zhang, Mingkai Dong, and Haibo Chen. 2016. Efficient and Available In-memory KV-store with Hybrid Erasure Coding and Replication. In Proceedings of the 14th Usenix Conf. on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX, 167--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. TEA: A Traffic-efficient Erasure-coded Archival Scheme for In-memory Stores

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

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

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ICPP '19: Proceedings of the 48th International Conference on Parallel Processing
        August 2019
        1107 pages
        ISBN:9781450362955
        DOI:10.1145/3337821

        Copyright © 2019 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 5 August 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate91of313submissions,29%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader