skip to main content
10.1145/1868447.1868462acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Location, location, location!: modeling data proximity in the cloud

Published:20 October 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Cloud applications have increasingly come to rely on distributed storage systems that hide the complexity of handling network and node failures behind simple, data-centric interfaces (such as PUTs and GETs on key-value pairs). While these interfaces are very easy to use, the application is completely oblivious to the location of its data in the network; as a result, it has no way to optimize the placement of data or computation. In this paper, we propose exposing the network location of data to applications. The primary challenge is that data does not usually exist at a single point in the network; it can be striped, replicated, cached and coded across different locations, in arbitrary ways that vary across storage systems. For example, an item that is synchronously mirrored in both Seattle and London will appear equally far from both locations for writes, but equally close to both locations for reads. Accordingly, we describe Contour, a system that allows applications to query and manipulate the location of data without requiring them to be aware of the physical machines storing the data, the replication protocols used or the underlying network topology.

References

  1. S. Agarwal, J. Dunagan, N. Jain, S. Saroiu, A. Wolman, and H. Bhogan. Volley: Automated Data Placement for Geo-Distributed Cloud Services. In NSDI 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. N. Belaramani, J. Zheng, A. Nayate, R. Soulé, M. Dahlin, and R. Grimm. PADS: a policy architecture for distributed storage systems. In NSDI 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. F. Dabek, R. Cox, F. Kaashoek, and R. Morris. Vivaldi: A decentralized network coordinate system. In SIGCOMM 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. H. Madhyastha, T. Isdal, M. Piatek, C. Dixon, T. Anderson, A. Krishnamurthy, and A. Venkataramani. iPlane: An information plane for distributed services. In OSDI 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. V. Ramasubramanian, D. Malkhi, F. Kuhn, M. Balakrishnan, A. Gupta, and A. Akella. On the treeness of internet latency and bandwidth. In SIGMETRICS 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. B. Wong, A. Slivkins, and E. Sirer. Meridian: A lightweight network location service without virtual coordinates. In SIGCOMM 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Location, location, location!: modeling data proximity in the cloud

      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
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        Hotnets-IX: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks
        October 2010
        136 pages
        ISBN:9781450304092
        DOI:10.1145/1868447

        Copyright © 2010 ACM

        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: 20 October 2010

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate110of460submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader