ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Storage performance virtualization via throughput and latency control
Full text PdfPdf (524 KB)
Source ACM Transactions on Storage (TOS) archive
Volume 2 ,  Issue 3  (August 2006) table of contents
Pages: 283 - 308  
Year of Publication: 2006
ISSN:1553-3077
Authors
Jianyong Zhang  The Penn State University, University Park, PA
Anand Sivasubramaniam  The Penn State University, University Park, PA
Qian Wang  The Penn State University, University Park, PA
Alma Riska  Seagate Research Center, Pittsburgh, PA
Erik Riedel  Seagate Research Center, Pittsburgh, PA
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 20,   Downloads (12 Months): 217,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1168910.1168913
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

I/O consolidation is a growing trend in production environments due to increasing complexity in tuning and managing storage systems. A consequence of this trend is the need to serve multiple users and/or workloads simultaneously. It is imperative to ensure that these users are insulated from each other by virtualization in order to meet any service-level objective (SLO). Previous proposals for performance virtualization suffer from one or more of the following drawbacks: (1) They rely on a fairly detailed performance model of the underlying storage system; (2) couple rate and latency allocation in a single scheduler, making them less flexible; or (3) may not always exploit the full bandwidth offered by the storage system.This article presents a two-level scheduling framework that can be built on top of an existing storage utility. This framework uses a low-level feedback-driven request scheduler, called AVATAR, that is intended to meet the latency bounds determined by the SLO. The load imposed on AVATAR is regulated by a high-level rate controller, called SARC, to insulate the users from each other. In addition, SARC is work-conserving and tries to fairly distribute any spare bandwidth in the storage system to the different users. This framework naturally decouples rate and latency allocation. Using extensive I/O traces and a detailed storage simulator, we demonstrate that this two-level framework can simultaneously meet the latency and throughput requirements imposed by an SLO, without requiring extensive knowledge of the underlying storage system.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
 
3
 
4
Chambliss, D., Alvarez, G., Pandey, P., Jadav, D., Xu, J., Menon, R., and Lee, T. 2003. Performance virtulization for large-scale storage systems. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems (SRDS).
 
5
Ganger, G., Worthington, B., and Patt, Y. 2006. The DiskSim Simulation Environment Version 2.0 Reference Manual. http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/DiskSim/.
 
6
Goyal, P., Jadav, D., Modha, D. S., and Tewari, R. 2003. CacheCOW: QoS for storage system caches. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS), Monterey, CA.
7
8
 
9
Karlsson, M., Karamanolis, C., and Zhu, X. 2004. Triage: Performance isolation and differentiation for storage systems. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS).
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
14
 
15
The Openmail Trace. 2006. http://tesla.hpl.hp.com/private_software/.
 
16
17
 
18
WebSearch trace. 2006. http://traces.cs.umass.edu/storage/.
19
 
20
Zhang, H. 1995. Service disciplines for guaranteed performance service in packet-switching networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE 83 Conference.
 
21


Collaborative Colleagues:
Jianyong Zhang: colleagues
Anand Sivasubramaniam: colleagues
Qian Wang: colleagues
Alma Riska: colleagues
Erik Riedel: colleagues