Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Large parallel file systems (PFSs) must service multiple independent workloads concurrently. Workloads often require different quality of service (QoS) of metadata I/O. However, existing PFSs are unable to differentiate metadata I/O from different workloads. There are many researches on QoS support of storage system, they do not focus on metadata I/O of PFSs as one metadata I/O can have several sub-operations and different sub-operations have different access size. In addition, users cannot specify metadata QoS requirements without a suitable QoS specification. This paper presents a novel scheme QoSFM (QoS Support for Metadata) to support metadata I/O QoS in PFSs. QoSFM allows users to specify workloads' metadata QoS requirements through our two-layered QoS specification mechanism. QoSFM can dynamically translate the workload-level goals into system resource needs such as service time per time window and sub-operation latency. Client-side controllers throttle the metadata I/O based on service time allocation to meet the throughput goal while metadata servers (MDSs) reorder the sub-operations based on deadlines to meet the latency goal. Extensive simulations show that QoSFM can effectively satisfy workload-level metadata I/O QoS requirements. Meanwhile, results also show that QoSFM has low overhead. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2013 | 10.1109/HPCC.and.EUC.2013.14 | 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications & 2013 IEEE International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
QoS,Metadata I/O,Parallel file system,Resource allocation | Resource management,Metadata,Computer data storage,Latency (engineering),Computer science,Server,Quality of service,Computer network,Real-time computing,Input/output,Throughput,Distributed computing | Conference |
Citations | PageRank | References |
0 | 0.34 | 5 |
Authors | ||
5 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limin Xiao | 1 | 107 | 28.51 |
| Xie Ke | 2 | 8 | 1.46 |
| Guoying Li | 3 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Li Ruan | 4 | 123 | 25.10 |
| Xiuqiao Li | 5 | 51 | 5.74 |