Abstract
Currently the QoS requirements for storage systems are usually presented in the form of service-level agreement (SLA) to bound I/O measures such as latency and throughput of I/O requests. However, SLA is not an effective performance interface for users to specify their required I/O service quality for two major reasons. First, for users it is difficult to determine appropriate latency and throughput bounds to ensure their required application performance without resource over-provisioning. Second, for storage system administrators it is a challenge to estimate a user’s real resource demand because the specified SLA measures are not consistently correlated with the user’s resource demand. This makes resource provisioning and scheduling less informative and can greatly reduce system efficiency.
We propose the concept of reference storage system (RSS), which can be a storage system chosen by users and whose performance can be measured offline and mimicked online, as a performance interface between applications and storage servers. By designating an RSS to represent I/O performance requirement, a user can expect the performance received from a shared storage server servicing his I/O workload is not worse than the performance received from the RSS servicing the same workload. The storage system is responsible for implementing the RSS interface. The key enabling techniques are a machine learning model that derives request-specific performance requirements and an RSS-centric scheduling that efficiently allocates resource among requests from different users. The proposed scheme, named as YouChoose, supports the user-chosen performance interface through efficiently implementing and migrating virtual storage devices in a host storage system. Our evaluation based on trace-driven simulations shows that YouChoose can precisely implement the RSS performance interface, achieve a strong performance assurance and isolation, and improve the efficiency of a consolidated storage system consisting of different types of storage devices.
- Anderson, E. 2001. Simple table-based modeling of storage devices. Tech. rep. HPL-SSP-2001-04. HP Laboratories.Google Scholar
- Anderson, E., Hobbs, M., Keeton, K., Spence, S., Uysal, M., and Veitch, A. 2002. Hippodrome:running circles around storage administration. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bruno, J., Brustoloni, J., Gabber, E., Ozden, B., and Silberschatz, A. 1999. Disk scheduling with quality of service guarantees. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems. IEEE. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Chambliss, D., Alvarez, G., Pandey, P., Jadav, D., Xu, J., Menon, R., and Lee, T. 2003. Performance virtualization for large-scale storage systems. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems.Google Scholar
- Cruz, R. 1995. Quality of service guarantees in virtual circuit switched networks. IEEE J. Select. Areas Comm. 13, 6. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- DiskSim. 2009. The disksim simulation environment (version 3.0). http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/DiskSim/.Google Scholar
- Flash Simulator. 2009. A simulator for various FTL schemes, Penn State Computer Systems Lab. http://csl.cse.psu.edu/?q=node/322.Google Scholar
- Gibson, G. and Meter, R. 2000. Network attached atorage architecture. Comm. ACM 43, 11. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gulati, A., Merchant, A., and Varman, P. 2007. Pclock: An arrival curve based approach for qos guarantees in shared systems. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gulati, A., Ahmad, I., and Waldspurger, C. A. 2009. Parda: Proportional allocation of resources for distributed storage access. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gulati, A., Merchant, A., and Varman, P. 2010. mclock: Handling throughput variability for hypervisor IO scheduling. In Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gupta, A., Kim, Y., and Urgaonkar, B. 2009. DFTL: A flash translation layer employing demand-based selective caching of page-level address mappings. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Hewlett-Packard Company. 2001. Openmail Technical Reference Guide. HP Laboratories.Google Scholar
- Huang, L., Peng, G., and Chiueh, T. 2004. Multi-dimensional storage virtualization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jin, W., Chase, J., and Kaur, J. 2007. Interposed proportional sharing for a storage service utility. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kelly, T., Cohen, I., Goldszmidt, M., and Keeton, K. 2004. Inducing models of black-box storage arrays. Tech. rep. HPL-SSP-2004-108. HP Laboratories.Google Scholar
- Lu, C., Alvarez, G., and Wilkes, J. 2002. Aqueduct: Online data migration with performance guarantees. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Lumb, C., Merchant, A., and Alvarezg, G. 2003. Facade: Virtual storage devices with performance guaratees. In Proceeding of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Mesnier, M., Wachs, M., Sambasivan, R., Zheng, A., and Ganger, G. 2007. Modeling the relative fitness of storage. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Peng, G. and Chiueh, T. 2008. Availability and fairness support for storage qos guarantee. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Conference. IEEE. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Popovici, F., Arpaci-Dusseau, A., and Arpaci-Dusseau, R. 2003. Robust, portable i/o scheduling with the disk mimic. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. USENIX.Google Scholar
- Recker, S., Geisselhardt, W., and Wolff, I. 2003. Service curve based routing subject to deterministic qos constraints. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Telecommunications.Google Scholar
- Ruemmler, C. and Wilkes, J. 1994. An introduction to disk drive modeling. Comput. 27, 3. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sariowan, H., Cruz, R., and Polyzos, G. 1995. Scheduling for quality of service guarantees via service curves. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Schlosser, S., Schindler, J., Papadomanolakis, S., Shao, M., Ailamaki, A., Faloutsos, C., and Ganger, G. 2005. On multidimensional data and modern disks. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Smirni, E. and Reed, D. 1997. Workload characterization of input/output intensive parallel applications. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Performance Evaluation: Modeling and Techniques and Tools. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Stoica, I., Zhang, H., and Ng, T. 1997. A hierarchical fair service curve algorithm for link-sharing, real-time and priority services. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Storage Area Network. 2009. Storage area network. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storage_area_network.Google Scholar
- Tran, N. and Reed, D. 2001. Arima time series modeling and forecasting for adaptive i/o prefetching. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Supercomputing. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- UMASS Trace Repository. 2009. Oltp application and search engine I/O. Umass Trace Repository. http://traces.cs.umass.edu/index.php/Storage/Storage.Google Scholar
- Uttamchandani, S., Yin, L., Alvarez, G., Palmer, J., and Agha, G. 2005. Chamelon: A self-evolving, fully-adaptive resource arbitrator for storage systems. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wachs, M., Abd-El-Malek, M., Thereska, E., and Ganger, G. 2007. Argon: Performance insulation for shared storage servers. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wang, M., Au, K., Ailamaki, A., Brockwell, A., Faloutsos, C., and Ganger, G. 2004. Storage device performance prediction with cart models. In Proceedings of the 12th MASCOTS Conference. IEEE. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wilkes, J., Golding, R., Staelin, C., and Sullivan, T. 1996. The hp autoraid hierarchical storage system. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 14, 1. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Worthington, B., Ganger, G., and Patt, Y. 1994. Scheduling algorithm for modern disk drives. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference. ACM. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Zhang, J., Sivasubramaniam, A., Wang, Q., Riska, A., and Riedel, E. 2006. Storage performance virtualization via throughput and latency control. ACM Trans. Stor. 2, 3. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
YouChoose: Choosing your Storage Device as a Performance Interface to Consolidated I/O Service
Recommendations
YouChoose: A performance interface enabling convenient and efficient QoS support for consolidated storage systems
MSST '11: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 27th Symposium on Mass Storage Systems and TechnologiesCurrently the QoS requirements for disk-based storage systems are usually presented in the form of service-level agreement (SLA) to bound I/O measures such as latency and throughput of I/O requests. However, SLA is not an effective performance interface ...
QBox: guaranteeing I/O performance on black box storage systems
HPDC '12: Proceedings of the 21st international symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed ComputingMany storage systems are shared by multiple clients with different types of workloads and performance targets. To achieve performance targets without over-provisioning, a system must provide isolation between clients. Throughput-based reservations are ...
Performance Evaluation of Hypervisors for Cloud Computing
The virtualization of IT infrastructure enables consolidation and pooling of IT resources so they are shared over diverse applications to offset the limitation of shrinking resources and growing business needs. Virtualization provides a logical ...






Comments