Abstract
Building reliable storage systems becomes increasingly challenging as the complexity of modern storage systems continues to grow. Understanding storage failure characteristics is crucially important for designing and building a reliable storage system. While several recent studies have been conducted on understanding storage failures, almost all of them focus on the failure characteristics of one component—disks—and do not study other storage component failures.
This article analyzes the failure characteristics of storage subsystems. More specifically, we analyzed the storage logs collected from about 39,000 storage systems commercially deployed at various customer sites. The dataset covers a period of 44 months and includes about 1,800,000 disks hosted in about 155,000 storage-shelf enclosures. Our study reveals many interesting findings, providing useful guidelines for designing reliable storage systems. Some of our major findings include: (1) In addition to disk failures that contribute to 20--55% of storage subsystem failures, other components such as physical interconnects and protocol stacks also account for a significant percentage of storage subsystem failures. (2) Each individual storage subsystem failure type, and storage subsystem failure as a whole, exhibits strong self-correlations. In addition, these failures exhibit “bursty” patterns. (3) Storage subsystems configured with redundant interconnects experience 30--40% lower failure rates than those with a single interconnect. (4) Spanning disks of a RAID group across multiple shelves provides a more resilient solution for storage subsystems than within a single shelf.
- Allen, B. 2004. Monitoring hard disks with smart. Linux J. 117, 9. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bairavasundaram, L. N., Goodson, G. R., Schroeder, B., Arpaci-Dusseau, A. C., and Arpaci-Dusseau, R. H. 2008. An Analysis of data corruption in the storage stack. In Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), San Jose, CA. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bairavasundaram, L. N., Goodson, G. R., Pasupathy, S., and Schindler, J. 2007. An analysis of latent sector errors in disk drives. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 35, 1, 289--300. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Cole, G. 2000. Estimating drive reliability in desktop computers and consumer electronics systems. Tech. Rep., Seagate Technology Paper TP-338.1.Google Scholar
- Corbett, P., English, B., Goel, A., Grcanac, T., Kleiman, S., Leong, J., and Sankar, S. 2004. Row-Diagonal parity for double disk failure correction. In Proceedings of the 3rd USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), 1--14. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Elerath, J. G. and Shah, S. 2004. Server class disk drives: How reliable are they. In Proceedings of the IEEE Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 151--156.Google Scholar
- Elerath, J. G. and Shah, S. 2003. Disk drive reliability case study: Dependence upon head fly-height and quantity of heads. In Proceedings of the Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 608--612.Google Scholar
- EMC. 2007. EMC symmetrix DMX-4 specification sheet. http://www.emc.com/products/systems/symmetrix/symmetri_DMX1000/pdf/DMX3000.pdf.Google Scholar
- Ghemawat, S., Gobioff, H., and Leung, S.-T. 2003. The Google file system. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP), New York, 29--43. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gray, J. 1990. A census of tandem system availability between 1985 and 1990. In Proceedings of the IEEE Transactions on Reliability.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Lancaster, L. and Rowe, A. 2001. Measuring real-world data availability. In Proceedings of the 15th USENIX Conference on System Administration (LISA), Berkeley, CA, 93--100. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- NetApp. 2008. FAS6000 series technical specifications. http://www.netapp.com/products/filer/fas6000_tech_specs.html.Google Scholar
- Patterson, D. A., Gibson, G. A., and Katz, R. H. 1988. A case for redundant arrays of inexpensive disks (RAID). In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Chicago, IL, H. Boral and P.-Å. Larson, eds. ACM Press, 109--116. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Pinheiro, E., Weber, W.-D., and Barroso, L. A. 2007. Failure trends in a large disk drive population. In Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), Berkeley, CA. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Rosander, A. C. 1951. Elementary Principles of Statistics. D. Van Nostrand Company.Google Scholar
- Schroeder, B. and Gibson, G. A. 2007. Disk failures in the real world: What does an MTTF of 1,000,000 hours mean to you? In Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), Berkeley, CA. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Schulze, M., Gibson, G. A., Katz, R. H., and Patterson, D. A. 1989. How reliable is a RAID? In Proceedings of the COMPCON. 118--123.Google Scholar
- Shah, S. and Elerath, J. G. 2005. Reliability analysis of disk drive failure mechanisms. In Proceedings of the IEEE Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 226--231.Google Scholar
- SNIA. 2008. Storage Networking Industry Association dictionary. http://www.snia.org/education/dictionary/.Google Scholar
- Talagala, N. and Patterson, D. 1999. An analysis of error behaviour in a large storage system. Tech. Rep. UCB/CSD-99-1042. Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, University of California, Berkeley. February. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Yang, J. and Sun, F.-B. 1999. A comprehensive review of hard-disk drive reliability. In Proceedings of the Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 403--409.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Are disks the dominant contributor for storage failures?: A comprehensive study of storage subsystem failure characteristics
Recommendations
Are disks the dominant contributor for storage failures?: a comprehensive study of storage subsystem failure characteristics
FAST'08: Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Conference on File and Storage TechnologiesBuilding reliable storage systems becomes increasingly challenging as the complexity of modern storage systems continues to grow. Understanding storage failure characteristics is crucially important for designing and building a reliable storage system. ...
Protecting Data against Consecutive Disk Failures in RAID-5
ENC '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Mexican International Conference on Computer ScienceIn this letter we present a reorganization method to protect against data loss when one or two disks fail in a RAID level 5. The main advantage of the proposed method is that it is robust against a second failure if a first failed disk has not been ...
A multiple disk failure recovery scheme in RAID systems
In this paper, we propose a practical disk error recovery scheme tolerating multiple simultaneous disk failures in a typical RAID system, resulting in improvement in availability and reliability. The scheme is composed of the encoding and the decoding ...






Comments