skip to main content
research-article

Principled Schedulability Analysis for Distributed Storage Systems Using Thread Architecture Models

Published:06 March 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this article, we present an approach to systematically examine the schedulability of distributed storage systems, identify their scheduling problems, and enable effective scheduling in these systems. We use Thread Architecture Models (TAMs) to describe the behavior and interactions of different threads in a system, and show both how to construct TAMs for existing systems and utilize TAMs to identify critical scheduling problems. We specify three schedulability conditions that a schedulable TAM should satisfy: completeness, local enforceability, and independence; meeting these conditions enables a system to easily support different scheduling policies. We identify five common problems that prevent a system from satisfying the schedulability conditions, and show that these problems arise in existing systems such as HBase, Cassandra, MongoDB, and Riak, making it difficult or impossible to realize various scheduling disciplines. We demonstrate how to address these schedulability problems using both direct and indirect solutions, with different trade-offs. To show how to apply our approach to enable scheduling in realistic systems, we develop Tamed-HBase and Muzzled-HBase, sets of modifications to HBase that can realize the desired scheduling disciplines, including fairness and priority scheduling, even when presented with challenging workloads.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Pelikan Cache. 2020. Taming Tail Latency and Achieving Predictability. Retrieved from https://www.pelikan.io/2020/benchmark-adq.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [2] Waldspurger Ajay Gulati, Irfan Ahmad, and Carl A.. 2009. PARDA: Proportional allocation of resources for distributed storage access. In Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Symposium on File and Storage Technologies (FAST’09). 8598.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Anandkumar Animashree, Bisdikian Chatschik, and Agrawal Dakshi. 2008. Tracking in a spaghetti bowl: Monitoring transactions using footprints. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 36. ACM, 133144.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. [4] Andersson Björn, Baruah Sanjoy, and Jonsson Jan. 2001. Static-priority scheduling on multiprocessors. In Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’01). IEEE, 193202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Sabuncuoglu Ayşegül Toptal and Ihsan. 2010. Distributed scheduling: A review of concepts and applications. Int. J. Prod. Res. 48, 18 (2010), 52355262. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Beaver Doug, Kumar Sanjeev, Li Harry C., Sobel Jason, and Vajgel Peter. 2010. Finding a needle in Haystack: Facebook’s photo storage. In Proceedings of the 9th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’10).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. [7] Harchol-Balter Bianca Schroeder, Adam Wierman, and Mor. 2006. Open versus closed: A cautionary tale. In Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’06). 239252. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi-06/open-versus-closed-cautionary-tale.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. [8] Bonald Thomas and Roberts James. 2015. Multi-resource fairness: Objectives, algorithms and performance. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS’15). 3142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Burrows Michael. 2006. The chubby lock service for loosely-coupled distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’06). USENIX Association, 335350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. [10] Cassandra. 2016. Cassandra Issues: Move away from SEDA to TPC. Retrieved from https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10989.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [11] Chen Shuang, Delimitrou Christina, and Martínez José F.. 2019. Parties: Qos-aware resource partitioning for multiple interactive services. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS’19).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Brewer Mike Y. Chen, Anthony Accardi, Emre Kiciman, Jim Lloyd, Dave Patterson, Armando Fox, and Eric. 2004. Path-based faliure and evolution management. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’04). 2323.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. [13] Chetto Houssine and Chetto Maryline. 1989. Some results of the earliest deadline scheduling algorithm. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 15, 10 (1989), 1261.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. [14] Chiu Dah-Ming and Jain Raj. 1989. Analysis of the increase and decrease algorithms for congestion avoidance in computer networks. Comput. Netw. ISDN Syst. 17, 1 (1989), 114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] Chodorow Kristina. 2013. MongoDB: The Definitive Guide. O’Reilly Media, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. [16] Clark David D., Jacobson Van, Romkey John, and Salwen Howard. 1989. An analysis of TCP processing overhead. IEEE Commun. Mag. 27, 6 (1989), 2329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Cooper Brian F., Silberstein Adam, Tam Erwin, Ramakrishnan Raghu, and Sears Russell. 2010. Benchmarking cloud serving systems with YCSB. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing. ACM, 143154.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. [18] Davidrajuh Reggie. 2012. Activity-Oriented Petri Net for scheduling of resources. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC’12). IEEE, 12011206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Dean Jeffrey and Barroso Luiz André. 2013. The tail at scale. Commun. ACM 56, 2 (2013), 7480.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Gupta Ludmila Cherkasova Diwaker, Gardner Rob, and Vahdat Amin. 2006. Enforcing performance isolation across virtual machines in Xen. In Proceedings of the ACM/IFIP/USENIX 7th International Middleware Conference (Middleware’06).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Elser Josh. 2017. Personal Correspondence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. [22] Faggioli Dario, Trimarchi Michael, Checconi Fabio, Bertogna Marko, and Mancina Antonio. 2009. An implementation of the earliest deadline first algorithm in linux. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. 19841989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. [23] Fink Bryan. 2012. Distributed computation on dynamo-style distributed storage: Riak pipe. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Erlang Workshop. ACM, 4350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. [24] Fink Bryan. 2017. Personal Correspondence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. [25] Fried Joshua, Ruan Zhenyuan, Ousterhout Amy, and Belay Adam. 2020. Caladan: Mitigating interference at microsecond timescales. In Proceedings of the 14th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’20). 281297.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] George Lars. 2011. HBase: The Definitive Guide: Random Access to Your Planet-Size Data. O’Reilly Media, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. [27] Ghemawat Sanjay, Gobioff Howard, and Leung Shun-Tak. 2003. The Google file system. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’03). 2943.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Ghodsi Ali, Zaharia Matei, Hindman Benjamin, Konwinski Andy, Shenker Scott, and Stoica Ion. 2011. Dominant resource fairness: Fair allocation of multiple resource types. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’11). 2424.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Gu Dikang. 2017. Personal Correspondence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. [30] Gulati Ajay, Merchant Arif, and Varman Peter J.. 2007. pClock: An arrival curve based approach for QoS guarantees in shared storage systems. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS’07). ACM, New York, NY, 1324. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. [31] HBase. 2013. HBase Issue Tracking Page. Retrieved from https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8884.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. [32] HBase. 2016. HBase Issue Tracking Page. Retrieved from https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8836.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. [33] Wilkes Hiep Nguyen, Zhiming Shen, Xiaohui Gu, Sethuraman Subbiah, and John. 2013. AGILE: Elastic distributed resource scaling for infrastructure-as-a-service. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC’13). 6982. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/icac13/technical-sessions/presentation/nguyen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. [34] Hildebrand Dean and Serenyi Denis. 2021. Colossus under the Hood: A Peek into Google’s Scalable Storage System. Retrieved from https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/storage-data-transfer/a-peek-behind-colossus-googles-file-system.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] Hunt Patrick, Konar Mahadev, Junqueira Flavio P., and Reed Benjamin. 2010. ZooKeeper: Wait-free coordination for internet-scale systems. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX’10). 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. [36] Project IO Visor. 2021. BPF Compiler Collection (BCC). Retrieved from https://github.com/iovisor/bcc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. [37] Jansen Pierre G., Mullender Sape J., Havinga Paul J. M., and Scholten Hans. 2003. Lightweight EDF scheduling with deadline inheritance. University of Twente, Centre for Telematics and Information Technology, Enschede, Netherlands, Technical Report TR-CTIT-03-23 (2003).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. [38] Musuvathi Jonathan Mace, Peter Bodik, Rodrigo Fonseca, and Madanlal. 2015. Retro: Targeted resource management in multi-tenant distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 12th Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’15). 589603. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi15/technical-sessions/presentation/mace.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. [39] Karatza Helen D.. 2000. A comparative analysis of scheduling policies in a distributed system using simulation. In International Journal of SIMULATION Systems, Science & Technology. Vol. 1. UK Simulation Society, 1220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. [40] Kay Jonathan and Pasquale Joseph. 1993. The importance of non-data touching processing overheads in TCP/IP. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 23. ACM, 259268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Kelly Frank P., Maulloo Aman K., and Tan David Kim Hong. 1998. Rate control for communication networks: Shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 49, 3 (1998), 237252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Kleinrock Leonard. 1976. Queueing Systems, Volume 2: Computer Applications. Vol. 66. Wiley New York. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. [43] Klophaus Rusty. 2010. Riak core: Building distributed applications without shared state. In ACM SIGPLAN Commercial Users of Functional Programming. ACM, 14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. [44] Kumar Alok, Jain Sushant, Naik Uday, Raghuraman Anand, Kasinadhuni Nikhil, Zermeno Enrique Cauich, Gunn C. Stephen, Ai Jing, Carlin Björn, Amarandei-Stavila Mihai, et al. 2015. BwE: Flexible, hierarchical bandwidth allocation for WAN distributed computing. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 45. ACM, 114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Julian Köllerström,. 1974. Heavy traffic theory for queues with several servers. I. J. Appl. Prob. 11, 3 (1974), 544552. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. [46] Lakshman Avinash and Malik Prashant. 2009. Cassandra—A decentralized structured storage system. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGOPS International Workshop on Large Scale Distributed Systems and Middleware.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. [47] Casanova A. Legrand, L. Marchal, and H.. 2003. Scheduling distributed applications: The SimGrid simulation framework. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid’03).138145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. [48] Leung Joseph Y.-T. and Whitehead Jennifer. 1982. On the complexity of fixed-priority scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks. Perform. Eval. 2, 4 (1982), 237250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Mace Jonathan, Bodik Peter, Musuvathi Madanlal, Fonseca Rodrigo, and Varadarajan Krishnan. 2016. 2DFQ: Two-dimensional fair queuing for multi-tenant cloud services. In Proceedings of the Conference on ACM SIGCOMM. ACM, 144159.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. [50] Matloff Norm. 2008. Introduction to discrete-event simulation and the SimPy language. Department of Computer Science, University of California at Davis, Davis, CA. Retrieved on August 2, 2009. https://simpy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. [51] Menga Giuseppe, Bruno Giorgio, Conterno Renato, and Dato M.. 1984. Modeling FMS by closed queuing network analysis methods. IEEE Trans. Comp., Hybrids, Manufact. Technol. 7, 3 (1984), 241248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. [52] MongoDB. 2016. MongoDB Issue Tracking Page. Retrieved from https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-24661.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. [53] MongoDB. 2016. MongoDB Issue Tracking Page. Retrieved from https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-20328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. [54] MongoDB. 2020. Command Dispatch. Retrieved from https://github.com/mongodb/mongo/blob/master/docs/command_dispatch.md.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. [55] MongoDB. 2021. Server-Internal Baton Pattern. Retrieved from https://github.com/mongodb/mongo/blob/master/docs/baton.md.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. [56] Muthukkaruppan Kannan. 2011. Storage infrastructure behind Facebook messages. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems (HPTS’11).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. [57] Nokleberg Chris and Hawkes Brad. 2021. Application frameworks. Commun. ACM 64, 7 (2021), 4249.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. [58] Liu Onno Boxma, Ger Koole, and Zhen. 1996. Queueing-theoretic solution methods for models of parallel and distributed systems. In Performance Evaluation of Parallel and Distributed Systems Solution Methods. CWI Tract 105 & 106. 124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. [59] Shenker Kay Ousterhout, Christopher Canel, Sylvia Ratnasamy, and Scott. 2017. Monotasks: Architecting for performance clarity in data analytics frameworks. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’17). 184200.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. [60] Pai Vivek S., Druschel Peter, and Zwaenepoel Willy. 1999. Flash: An efficient and portable Web server. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX’99). 199212.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. [61] Mortier Paul Barham, Austin Donnelly, Rebecca Isaacs, and Richard. 2004. Using magpie for request extraction and workload modelling. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’04). 259272. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi-04/using-magpie-request-extraction-and-workload-modelling.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. [62] Peterson James L.. 1977. Petri nets. ACM Comput. Surv. 9, 3 (Sep.1977), 223252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. [63] Pu Qifan, Li Haoyuan, Zaharia Matei, Ghodsi Ali, and Stoica Ion. 2016. FairRide: Near-Optimal, fair cache sharing. In Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’16). 393406.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. [64] Sprecher Rainer Kolisch and Arno. 1997. PSPLIB - A project scheduling problem library: OR software—ORSEP operations research software exchange program. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 96, 1 (1997), 205216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. [65] Zhao K. Ramamritham, J. A. Stankovic, and W.. 1989. Distributed scheduling of tasks with deadlines and resource requirements. IEEE Trans. Comput. 38, 8 (1989), 11101123. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. [66] Reda Waleed, Canini Marco, Suresh Lalith, Kostić Dejan, and Braithwaite Sean. 2017. Rein: Taming tail latency in key-value stores via multiget scheduling. In Proceedings of the EuroSys Conference (EuroSys’17). 95110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. [67] Ricci Robert, Eide Eric, and Team CloudLab. 2014. Introducing CloudLab: Scientific infrastructure for advancing cloud architectures and applications. ;Login:: Mag. USENIX & SAGE 39, 6 (2014), 3638.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. [68] Luigi Rizzo,. 1997. Dummynet: A simple approach to the evaluation of network protocols. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 27, 1 (1997), 3141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. [69] Thereska Sebastian Angel, Hitesh Ballani, Thomas Karagiannis, Greg O’Shea, and Eno. 2014. End-to-end performance isolation through virtual datacenters. In Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’14). 233248. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi14/technical-sessions/presentation/angel.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. [70] Serenyi Denis. 2017. Cluster-Level Storage at Google. Retrieved from www.pdsw.org/pdsw-discs17/slides/PDSW-DISCS-Google-Keynote.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. [71] Sekiguchi H. M. Shih and T.. 1991. A timed Petri net and beam search based online FMS scheduling system with routing flexibility. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 25482553. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. [72] Hurson Behrooz A. Shirazi, Krishna M. Kavi, and Ali R.. 1995. Scheduling and Load Balancing in Parallel and Distributed Systems. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. [73] Shue David, Freedman Michael J., and Shaikh Anees. 2012. Performance isolation and fairness for multi-tenant cloud storage. In Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’12). 349362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. [74] Freedman David Shue and Michael J.. 2014. From application requests to Virtual IOPs: Provisioned key-value storage with Libra. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Computer Systems. ACM, 17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. [75] Shvachko Konstantin, Kuang Hairong, Radia Sanjay, and Chansler Robert. 2010. The hadoop distributed file system. In Proceedings of the 26th IEEE Symposium on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies (MSST’10).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. [76] Arpaci-Dusseau Suli Yang, Jing Liu, Andrea C. Arpaci-Dusseau, and Remzi H.. 2018. Principled schedulability analysis for distributed storage systems using thread architecture models. In Proceedings of the 13th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’18). 161176. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi18/presentation/yang.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. [77] Puthalath Lalith Suresh. 2016. On predictable performance for distributed systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technische Universität, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. [78] Foundation The Apache Software. 2021. Welcome to Apache ServiceMix! Retrieved from https://servicemix.apache.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. [79] Foundation The Linux. 2021. eBPF: Introduction, Tutorial & Community Resources. Retrieved from https://ebpf.io.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. [80] Zhu Eno Thereska, Hitesh Ballani, Greg O’Shea, Thomas Karagiannis, Antony Rowstron, Tom Talpey, Richard Black, and Timothy. 2013. IOFlow: A software-defined storage architecture. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’13). 182196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. [81] Tucker Andrew, Gupta Anoop, and Urushibara Shigeru. 1991. The impact of operating system scheduling policies and synchronization methods on the performance of parallel applications. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS’91).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. [82] Urgaonkar Bhuvan, Pacifici Giovanni, Shenoy Prashant, Spreitzer Mike, and Tantawi Asser. 2005. An analytical model for multi-tier internet services and its applications. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 33. ACM, 291302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. [83] Aalst Wil M. P. Van der. 1998. The application of petri nets to workflow management. J. Circ., Syst., Comput. 8, 1 (1998), 2166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  84. [84] Armstrong Robert Virding, Claes Wikström, Mike Williams, and Joe. 1996. Concurrent Programming in ERLANG (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., GBR. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. [85] Behren Rob Von, Condit Jeremy, Zhou Feng, Necula George C., and Brewer Eric. 2003. Capriccio: Scalable threads for internet services. ACM SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 37, 5 (2003), 268281.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. [86] Wachs Matthew, Abd-El-Malek Michael, Thereska Eno, and Ganger Gregory R.. 2007. Argon: Performance insulation for shared storage servers. In Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Symposium on File and Storage Technologies (FAST’07).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. [87] Stoica Andrew Wang, Shivaram Venkataraman, Sara Alspaugh, Randy Katz, and Ion. 2012. Cake: Enabling high-level SLOs on shared storage systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing (SOCC’12). 114.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  88. [88] Welsh Matt, Culler David, and Brewer Eric. 2001. SEDA: An architecture for well-conditioned, scalable internet services. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’01).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. [89] Zhao Yiqi Xu and Ming. 2016. IBIS: Interposed big-data I/O scheduler. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing. ACM, 111122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. [90] Plale Jiaan Zeng and Beth. 2015. Workload-aware resource reservation for multi-tenant NoSQL. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing. IEEE, 3241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. [91] Zhou MengChu and DiCesare Frank. 1991. Parallel and sequential mutual exclusions for petri net modeling of manufacturing systems with shared resources. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 7, 4 (1991), 515527.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  92. [92] Zhou MengChu and Wu Naiqi. 2009. System Modeling and Control with Resource-Oriented Petri Nets. Vol. 35. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  93. [93] Zhu Timothy, Tumanov Alexey, Kozuch Michael A., Harchol-Balter Mor, and Ganger Gregory R.. 2014. PriorityMeister: Tail latency QoS for shared networked storage. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing (SOCC’14). 114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Principled Schedulability Analysis for Distributed Storage Systems Using Thread Architecture Models

      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

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Storage
        ACM Transactions on Storage  Volume 19, Issue 2
        May 2023
        269 pages
        ISSN:1553-3077
        EISSN:1553-3093
        DOI:10.1145/3585541
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        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: 6 March 2023
        • Online AM: 12 December 2022
        • Accepted: 6 November 2022
        • Revised: 11 August 2022
        • Received: 18 February 2022
        Published in tos Volume 19, Issue 2

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)148
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)34

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Full Text

      View this article in Full Text.

      View Full Text

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!