*** empty log message ***
This commit is contained in:
parent
491f86b12a
commit
030ddeb31f
1 changed files with 22 additions and 14 deletions
|
@ -605,13 +605,20 @@ data primitives to application developers.
|
|||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item {\bf Atomic file-based transactions. Prototype blob implementation
|
||||
using force, shadow copies (trivial to implement given transactional
|
||||
pages). File systems that implement atomic operations may allow
|
||||
\item {\bf Atomic file-based transactions.
|
||||
|
||||
Prototype blob implementation using force, shadow copies (it is trivial to implement given transactional
|
||||
pages).
|
||||
|
||||
File systems that implement atomic operations may allow
|
||||
data to be stored durably without calling flush() on the data
|
||||
file. Current implementation useful for blobs that are typically
|
||||
file.
|
||||
|
||||
Current implementation useful for blobs that are typically
|
||||
changed entirely from update to update, but smarter implementations
|
||||
are certainly possible. The blob implementation primarily consists
|
||||
are certainly possible.
|
||||
|
||||
The blob implementation primarily consists
|
||||
of special log operations that cause file system calls to be made at
|
||||
appropriate times, and is simple, so it could easily be replaced by
|
||||
an application that frequently update small ranges within blobs, for
|
||||
|
@ -674,18 +681,17 @@ LLADD's linear hash table uses linked lists of overflow buckets.
|
|||
|
||||
\item {\bf Serialization Benchmarks (Abstract log) }
|
||||
|
||||
% Need to define application semantics workload (write heavy w/ periodic checkpoint?) that allows for optimization.
|
||||
{\bf Need to define application semantics workload (write heavy w/ periodic checkpoint?) that allows for optimization.}
|
||||
|
||||
% All of these graphs need X axis dimensions. Number of (read/write?) threads, maybe?
|
||||
{\bf All of these graphs need X axis dimensions. Number of (read/write?) threads, maybe?}
|
||||
|
||||
% Graph 1: Peak write throughput. Abstract log runs everything else into the ground (no disk i/o, basically, measure
|
||||
% contention on ringbuffer...)
|
||||
{\bf Graph 1: Peak write throughput. Abstract log wins (no disk i/o, basically, measure contention on ringbuffer, and compare to log I/O + hash table insertions.)}
|
||||
|
||||
% Graph 2: Measure maximum average write throughput: Write throughput vs. rate of log growth. Spool abstract log to disk.
|
||||
% Reads starve, or read stale data.
|
||||
{\bf Graph 2: Measure maximum average write throughput: Write throughput vs. rate of log growth. Spool abstract log to disk.
|
||||
Reads starve, or read stale data. }
|
||||
|
||||
% Graph 3: Latency @ peak steady state write throughput. Abstract log size remains constant. Measure read latency vs.
|
||||
% queue length.
|
||||
{\bf Graph 3: Latency @ peak steady state write throughput. Abstract log size remains constant. Measure read latency vs.
|
||||
queue length. This will show the system's 'second-order' ability to absorb spikes. }
|
||||
|
||||
\item {\bf Graph traversal benchmarks: Bulk load + hot and cold transitive closure queries}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -700,9 +706,11 @@ LLADD's linear hash table uses linked lists of overflow buckets.
|
|||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item {\bf Future work}
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item {\bf PL / Testing stuff}
|
||||
\item {\bf Explore async log capabilities further}
|
||||
|
||||
\item {\bf ... from old paper}
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\item {\bf Conclusion}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue