DOCSLIB.ORG

Cloud-Native Database Systems at Alibaba: Opportunities and Challenges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cloud-Native Database Systems at Alibaba: Opportunities and Challenges Cloud-Native Database Systems at Alibaba: Opportunities and Challenges Feifei Li Alibaba Group [email protected] ABSTRACT 1.25 125 Response time 1.00 100 Cloud-native databases become increasingly important for Normalized TPS the era of cloud computing, due to the needs for elasticity 0.75 75 and on-demand usage by various applications. These chal- lenges from cloud applications present new opportunities 0.50 50 for cloud-native databases that cannot be fully addressed 0.25 25 Normalized TPS by traditional on-premise enterprise database systems. A Response time (ms) 0 0 cloud-native database leverages software-hardware co-design 23:30 23:40 23:50 00:00 00:10 00:20 00:30 to explore accelerations offered by new hardware such as Time RDMA, NVM, kernel bypassing protocols such as DPDK. Meanwhile, new design architectures, such as shared stor- Figure 1: More than 100× increase in TPS along age, enable a cloud-native database to decouple computa- with stable response time observed during Alibaba's tion from storage and provide excellent elasticity. For highly Singles' Day Shopping Festival in 2018. concurrent workloads that require horizontal scalability, a cloud-native database can leverage a shared-nothing layer to 1. INTRODUCTION provide distributed query and transaction processing. Ap- With more and more applications and systems moving to plications also require cloud-native databases to offer high the cloud, cloud-native database systems start to gain wide availability through distributed consensus protocols. support and popularity. Cloud database services provided At Alibaba, we have explored a suite of technologies to de- by cloud service vendors, such as AWS, Microsoft Azure, sign cloud-native database systems. Our storage engine, X- Alibaba Cloud, and Google Cloud have contributed to the Engine and PolarFS, improves both write and read through- development of cloud-native databases. As a result, in re- puts by using a LSM-tree design and self-adapted sepa- cent years the market share of cloud databases has been ration of hot and cold data records. Based on these ef- growing rapidly. More and more enterprises and organiza- forts, we have designed and implemented POLARDB and tions have migrated their businesses from on-premise data its distributed version POLARDB-X, which has successfully centers to the cloud. The cloud platforms provide high elas- supported the extreme transaction workloads during the ticity, stringent service-level agreement (SLA) to ensure re- 2018 Global Shopping Festival on November 11, 2018, and liability, and easy manageability with reduced operational achieved commercial success on Alibaba Cloud. We have cost. The cloud databases play a key role in supporting also designed an OLAP system called AnalyticDB (ADB in cloud-based businesses. It becomes the central hub that short) for enabling real-time interactive data analytics for connects underlying resources (IaaS) to various applications big data. We have explored a self-driving database platform (SaaS), making it a key system for the cloud. to achieve autoscaling and intelligent database management. At the Alibaba group, database systems need to support We will report key technologies and lessons learned to high- a rich and complex business ecosystem that spans over en- light the technical challenges and opportunities for cloud- tertainment and digital media, e-commerce and e-payment, native database systems at Alibaba. and various new retail and o2o (offline to online) business PVLDB Reference Format: operations. During the 2018 Singles' Day Global Shopping Feifei Li. Cloud-Native Database Systems at Alibaba: Opportu- Festival (Nov. 11, 2018), Alibaba's databases process up to nities and Challenges. PVLDB, 12(12): 2263 - 2272, 2019. 491,000 sales transactions per second, which translates to DOI: https://doi.org/10.14778/3352063.3352141 more than 70 million transactions per second. The tradi- tional on-premise deployment of databases are not able to This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- catch up with the complexity of such business operations, NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy due to the needs for elasticity, scalability, and manageability. of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. For For example, as shown in Figure 1, the TPS is suddenly in- any use beyond those covered by this license, obtain permission by emailing creased in the first second of Singles' Day Shopping Festival, [email protected]. Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights which is about 122 times higher than that of the previous licensed to the VLDB Endowment. second. When we simply deploy a MySQL or PostgreSQL on Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, Vol. 12, No. 12 ISSN 2150-8097. a cloud instance store with a local SSD and a high I/O VM, DOI: https://doi.org/10.14778/3352063.3352141 the resulting database instance has limited capacity that is 2263 三种不同架构 not suitable for providing scalable database services. It can- Single Shared Everything not survive underlying disk drive failures; and the database Instance Shared Nothing instance has to manage data replication for reliability. In ad- Network Network Network dition, the instance uses a general-purpose file system, such as ext4 or XFS. When using low I/O latency hardware like DB DB DB DB DB DB DB DB RDMA or PCIe SSD, the message-passing cost between ker- nel space and user space may quickly saturate the through- Local disk Shared storage put. In contrast, databases with a cloud-native design (such Disk Disk Disk Disk as decouple of computation and storage, autoscaling) are Scale up Scale out more appealing, which are able to provision more compute and storage capacity, and provide faster recovery and lower Figure 2: Different database system architectures. cost [30, 7]. There are also other essential capacities that are of criti- chitecture facilitates and eases intra-system communication cal importance for cloud-native databases: multi-model that and coordination. supports heterogeneous data sources and diverse query in- With the rapid growth in both amounts of data and peak terfaces; autonomy and intelligence that automatically man- workloads of those encountered by giant Internet enterprises, ages and tunes database instances to reduce the cost of such as that in Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Alibaba, manual operations; software-hardware co-design that lever- it has been observed that the single-instance architecture ages the advantages of high-performance hardware; and high has inherent limitations. The capacity of a single machine availability that meets stringent SLA needs (e.g., RPO=0 fails to meet ever-increasing business demands. Therefore, with very small RTO). With these designs in mind, cloud- the shared storage architecture was proposed, represented native databases have gained rapid growth for cloud-based by AWS Aurora [30] and Alibaba POLARDB [5]. In this deployment. model, the underlying storage layer (usually consists of mul- In this paper, we report the recent progress in build- tiple nodes) is decoupled and each data record in storage ing cloud-native enterprise databases on Alibaba Cloud [1], can be accessed by any upper database kernels running on which also support the entire business operations within the any node. By exploiting a fast network such as RDMA, a Alibaba group from its various business units (from enter- database can interact with the shared distributed storage tainment to e-commerce to logistics). To cover a wide va- layer the same way as with a single (shared) local disk. On riety of application needs, we have provided a broad spec- top of this shared storage, we can easily launch multiple trum of database systems and tools as shown in Figure 3. In compute nodes to create replicas of a single database, hav- particular, we have developed POLARDB, a shared-storage ing the identical view on the same data. Therefore, requests OLTP database that provisions 100TB of storage capacity can be distributed to different (read-only) nodes for parallel and 1 million QPS per processing node. To further scale processing. However, to avoid write conflicts and to avoid out the capacity, we have developed POLARDB-X, a dis- the complexity of dealing with distributed transaction pro- tributed OLTP database that integrates shared-nothing and cessing and distributed commits, there is usually a single shared-storage designs. We have also developed Analyt- node that processes all write requests (e.g., INSERT, UPDATE, icDB, an OLAP database as a next-generation data ware- DELETE) to a database. This architecture enables dynamic house for high-concurrency, low-latency, and real-time ana- adjustment of query capacity on demand by changing the lytical queries at PB scale. To manage numerous database number of read-only nodes. It is also feasible to enable instances hosted on our cloud, we have built SDDP, an au- writes to multiple nodes (i.e., multi-master) to expand write tonomous database operation platform that automatically capacity, but usually requires complex concurrency control manages instances and tunes performance with minimal DBA mechanisms and consensus protocols [6, 12, 16, 17, 23, 34]. involvement. There are nearly half a million database in- The shared-storage architecture also has its own limita- stances running on Alibaba Cloud (from both our cloud tions. First, low-latency data transmission cannot be always customers and various business units within Alibaba group). guaranteed between compute and storage nodes. For those Both POLARDB and AnalyticDB have gained rapid growth messages transmitted cross switches, data centers or even re- in usage from a broad range of business sectors, including gions, the transmission time will be significantly amplified, e-commerce, finance, media and entertainment, education, especially when local RDMA network is used. Second, the new retail, and others. These cloud database systems and number of read-only nodes supported for a single database is technologies have successfully served both the complex busi- limited.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Data Velocity in Plain English
    Big Data Velocity in Plain English John Ryan Data Warehouse Solution Architect Table of Contents The Requirement . 1 What’s the Problem? . .. 2 Components Needed . 3 Data Capture . 3 Transformation . 3 Storage and Analytics . 4 The Traditional Solution . 6 The NewSQL Based Solution . 7 NewSQL Advantage . 9 Thank You. 10 About the Author . 10 ii The Requirement The assumed requirement is the ability to capture, transform and analyse data at potentially massive velocity in real time. This involves capturing data from millions of customers or electronic sensors, and transforming and storing the results for real time analysis on dashboards. The solution must minimise latency — the delay between a real world event and it’s impact upon a dashboard, to under a second. Typical applications include: • Monitoring Machine Sensors: Using embedded sensors in industrial machines or vehicles — typically referred to as The Internet of Things (IoT) . For example Progressive Insurance use real time speed and vehicle braking data to help classify accident risk and deliver appropriate discounts. Similar technology is used by logistics giant FedEx which uses SenseAware technology to provide near real-time parcel tracking. • Fraud Detection: To assess the risk of credit card fraud prior to authorising or declining the transaction. This can be based upon a simple report of a lost or stolen card, or more likely, an analysis of aggregate spending behaviour, aligned with machine learning techniques. • Clickstream Analysis: Producing real time analysis of user web site clicks to dynamically deliver pages, recommended products or services, or deliver individually targeted advertising. Big Data: Velocity in Plain English eBook 1 What’s the Problem? The primary challenge for real time systems architects is the potentially massive throughput required which could exceed a million transactions per second.
    [Show full text]
  • PS Non-Standard Database Systems Overview
    PS Non-Standard Database Systems Overview Daniel Kocher March 2019 is document gives a brief overview on three categories of non-standard database systems (DBS) in the context of this class. For each category, we provide you with a motivation, a discussion about the key properties, a list of commonly used implementations (proprietary and open-source/freely-available), and recommendation(s) for your project. For your convenience, we also recap some relevant terms (e.g., ACID, OLTP, ...). Terminology OLTP Online transaction processing. OLTP systems are highly optimized to process (1) short queries (operating only on a small portion of the database) and (2) small transac- tions (inserting/updating few tuples per relation). Typically, OLTP includes insertions, updates, and deletions. e main focus of OLTP systems is on low response time and high throughput (in terms of transactions per second). Databases in OLTP systems are highly normalized [5]. OLAP Online analytical processing. OLAP systems analyze complex data (usually from a data warehouse). Typically, queries in an OLAP system may run for a long time (as opposed to queries in OLTP systems) and the number of transactions is usually low. Fur- thermore, typical OLAP queries are read-only and touch a large portion of the database (e.g., scan or join large tables). e main focus of OLAP systems is on low response time. Databases in OLAP systems are oen de-normalized intentionally [5]. ACID Traditional relational database systems guarantee ACID properties: – Atomicity All or no operation(s) of a transaction are reected in the database. – Consistency Isolated execution of a transaction preserves consistency of the database.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Analysis of Blockchain Platforms
    UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones August 2018 Performance Analysis of Blockchain Platforms Pradip Singh Maharjan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations Part of the Computer Sciences Commons Repository Citation Maharjan, Pradip Singh, "Performance Analysis of Blockchain Platforms" (2018). UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 3367. http://dx.doi.org/10.34917/14139888 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF BLOCKCHAIN PLATFORMS By Pradip S. Maharjan Bachelor of Computer Engineering Tribhuvan University Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, Nepal 2012 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science in Computer Science Department of Computer Science Howard R. Hughes College of Engineering The Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas August 2018 c Pradip S. Maharjan, 2018 All Rights Reserved Thesis Approval The Graduate College The University of Nevada, Las Vegas May 4, 2018 This thesis prepared by Pradip S.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating and Comparing Oracle Database Appliance Performance Updated for Oracle Database Appliance X8-2-HA
    Evaluating and Comparing Oracle Database Appliance Performance Updated for Oracle Database Appliance X8-2-HA ORACLE WHITE PAPER | JANUARY 2020 DISCLAIMER The performance results in this paper are intended to give an estimate of the overall performance of the Oracle Database Appliance X8-2-HA system. The results are not a benchmark, and cannot be used to characterize the relative performance of Oracle Database Appliance systems from one generation to another, as the workload characteristics and other environmental factors including firmware, OS, and database patches, which includes Spectre/Meltdown fixes, will vary over time. For an accurate comparison to another platform, you should run the same tests, with the same OS (if applicable) and database versions, patch levels, etc. Do not rely on older tests or benchmark runs, as changes made to the underlying platform in the interim may substantially impact results. EVALUATING AND COMPARING ORACLE DATABASE APPLIANCE PERFORMANCE Table of Contents Introduction and Executive Summary 1 Audience 2 Objective 2 Oracle Database Appliance Deployment Architecture 3 Oracle Database Appliance Configuration Templates 3 What is Swingbench? 4 Swingbench Download and Setup 4 Configuring Oracle Database Appliance for Testing 5 Configuring Oracle Database Appliance System for Testing 5 Benchmark Setup 5 Database Setup 6 Schema Setup 6 Workload Setup and Execution 10 Benchmark Results 11 Workload Performance 11 Database and Operating System Statistics 12 Average CPU Busy 12 REDO Writes 13 Transaction Rate 13 Important Considerations for Performing the Benchmark 14 Conclusion 15 Appendix A Swingbench configuration files 16 Appendix B The loadgen.pl file 19 Appendix C The generate_awr.sh script 24 References 25 EVALUATING AND COMPARING ORACLE DATABASE APPLIANCE PERFORMANCE Introduction and Executive Summary Oracle Database Appliance X8-2-HA is a highly available Oracle database system.
    [Show full text]
  • 60-539: Emerging Non-Traditional Database Systems (Data Warehousing and Mining)
    60-539: Emerging non-traditional database systems (Data Warehousing and Mining): sdb1 warehouse sdb2 sdb3 Dr. C.I. Ezeife School of Computer Science, University of Windsor, Canada. Email: [email protected] 60-539 Dr. C.I. Ezeife @c 2021 1 PART I (DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OVERVIEW) DBMS (PART 1) OVERVIEW Components of a DBMS DBMS Data model Data Definition and Manipulation Language File Organization Techniques Query Optimization and Evaluation Facility Database Design and Tuning Transaction Processing Concurrency Control Database Security and Integrity Issues 60-539 Dr. C.I. Ezeife © 2021 2 DBMS OVERVIEW(What are?) What is a database? : It is a collection of data, typically describing the activities of one or more related organizations, e.g., a University, an airline reservation or a banking database. What is a DBMS?: A DBMS is a set of software for creating, querying, managing and keeping databases. Examples of DBMS’s are DB2, Informix, Sybase, Oracle, MYSQL, Microsoft Access (relational). Alternative to Databases: Storing all data for university, airline and banking information in separate files and writing separate program for each data file. What is a Data Warehouse?:A subject-oriented, historical, non- volatile database integrating a number of data sources. What is Data Mining?:Is data analysis for finding interesting trends or patterns in large dataset to guide decisions about future activities. 60-539 Dr. C.I. Ezeife © 2021 3 DBMS OVERVIEW(Evolution of Information Technology) 1960s and earlier: Primitive file processing: data are collected in files and manipulated with programs in Cobol and other languages. Disadv.: any change in storage structure of data requires changing the program (i.e., no logical or physical data independence).
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Ledger Technology-Based Databases
    future internet Article A Survey of Ledger Technology-Based Databases Dénes László Fekete 1 and Attila Kiss 1,2,* 1 Department of Information Systems, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 1117 Budapest, Hungary; [email protected] 2 Department of Informatics, J. Selye University, 945 01 Komárno, Slovakia * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The spread of crypto-currencies globally has led to blockchain technology receiving greater attention in recent times. This paper focuses more broadly on the uses of ledger databases as a traditional database manager. Ledger databases will be examined within the parameters of two categories. The first of these are Centralized Ledger Databases (CLD)-based Centralised Ledger Technology (CLT), of which LedgerDB will be discussed. The second of these are Permissioned Blockchain Technology-based Decentralised Ledger Technology (DLT) where Hyperledger Fabric, FalconDB, BlockchainDB, ChainifyDB, BigchainDB, and Blockchain Relational Database will be examined. The strengths and weaknesses of the reviewed technologies will be discussed, alongside a comparison of the mentioned technologies. Keywords: ledger technology; permissioned blockchain; centralised ledger database 1. Introduction Citation: Fekete, D.L.; Kiss, A. A In recent years, we have been witness to the rise of multiple new ledger technologies. Survey of Ledger Technology-Based Since Satosi Nakamoto wrote the Bitcoin white paper [1] in 2009, many different systems Databases. Future Internet 2021, 13, that endeavour to provide decentralization and trustless collaboration have been developed 197. https://doi.org/10.3390/ based on blockchain technology. Of late, a great amount of research and academia has been fi13080197 focused on the further development and reformation of the basis of blockchain in an attempt to solve the issues that continue to arise [2–4].
    [Show full text]
  • CSE 344 Final Examination Name
    CSE 344 Final Examination Monday, December 10, 2018, 2:30-4:20 Name: Question Points Score 1 30 2 20 3 20 4 30 5 20 6 35 7 45 Total: 200 • This exam is CLOSED book and CLOSED devices. • You are allowed TWO, HAND-WRITTEN letter-size sheets with notes (both sides). • You have 110 minutes; • Answer the easy questions before you spend too much time on the more difficult ones. • Good luck! 1 CSE 344 Final Dec 10, 2018, 2:30-4:20 1 Relational Data Model 1. (30 points) You are now a Climate Scientist, and run simulations to predict future changes in the climate. Your job is to improve the simulator in order to improve the climate predictions. Every time you have a new version of the simulator, you run it, and it will generate a dataset where, for each year, it records the predicted temperature at each location of your simulated area. You analyze the results, improve the simulator, and repeat. As a good scientist, you keep the results of all simulations in a relation with the following schema: Sim(version, year, loc, temp) The data types of Version and year are integers; temp is a real number; and loc is a text. (a) (5 points) Write a SQL CREATE TABLE statement to create the Sim relation. Identify the key in Sim, and create the key in your SQL statement. Choose float and for the real number type and text for the text type. Page 2 CSE 344 Final Dec 10, 2018, 2:30-4:20 Sim(version, year, loc, temp) (b) (5 points) Simulation version 13 is wrong, due to a bug in the simulator.
    [Show full text]
  • Extending ACID Semantics to the File System
    Extending ACID Semantics to the File System CHARLES P. WRIGHT IBM T. J. Watson Research Center RICHARD SPILLANE, GOPALAN SIVATHANU, and EREZ ZADOK Stony Brook University An organization’s data is often its most valuable asset, but today’s file systems provide few facilities to ensure its safety. Databases, on the other hand, have long provided transactions. Transactions are useful because they provide atomicity, consistency, isolation, and durability (ACID). Many applications could make use of these semantics, but databases have a wide variety of non-standard interfaces. For example, applications like mail servers currently perform elaborate error handling to ensure atomicity and consistency, because it is easier than using a DBMS. A transaction-oriented programming model eliminates complex error-handling code, because failed operations can simply be aborted without side effects. We have designed a file system that exports ACID transactions to user-level applications, while preserving the ubiquitous and convenient POSIX interface. In our prototype ACID file system, called Amino, updated applications can protect arbitrary sequences of system calls within a transaction. Unmodified applications operate without any changes, but each system call is transaction protected. We also built a recoverable memory library with support for nested transactions to allow applications to keep their in-memory data structures consistent with the file system. Our performance evaluation shows that ACID semantics can be added to applications with acceptable overheads.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 17: Parallel Databases
    ChapterChapter 18:18: ParallelParallel DatabasesDatabases IntroductionIntroduction • Parallel machines are becoming quite common and affordable – Prices of microprocessors, memory and disks have dropped sharply – Recent desktop computers feature multiple processors and this trend is projected to accelerate • Databases are growing increasingly large – large volumes of transaction data are collected and stored for later analysis. – multimedia objects like images are increasingly stored in databases • Large-scale parallel database systems increasingly used for: – storing large volumes of data – processing time-consuming decision-support queries – providing high throughput for transaction processing ParallelismParallelism inin DatabasesDatabases • Data can be partitioned across multiple disks for parallel I/O. • Individual relational operations (e.g., sort, join, aggregation) can be executed in parallel – data can be partitioned and each processor can work independently on its own partition. • Queries are expressed in high level language (SQL, translated to relational algebra) – makes parallelization easier. • Different queries can be run in parallel with each other. Concurrency control takes care of conflicts. • Thus, databases naturally lend themselves to parallelism. I/OI/O ParallelismParallelism • Reduce the time required to retrieve relations from disk by partitioning • The relations on multiple disks. • Horizontal partitioning – tuples of a relation are divided among many disks such that each tuple resides on one disk. • Partitioning techniques (number of disks = n): Round-robin: Send the I th tuple inserted in the relation to disk i mod n. Hash partitioning: – Choose one or more attributes as the partitioning attributes. – Choose hash function h with range 0…n - 1 – Let i denote result of hash function h applied to the partitioning attribute value of a tuple.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Benchmark Postgresql / Mongodb Performance Benchmark Postgresql / Mongodb
    PERFORMANCE BENCHMARK POSTGRESQL / MONGODB // CONTENTS // ABOUT THIS BENCHMARK 3 Introduction 3 OnGres Ethics Policy 4 Authors 4 // EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. BENCHMARKS KEY FINDINGS 5 Transactions benchmark 5 OLTP Benchmark 6 OLAP Benchmark 6 // METHODOLOGY AND BENCHMARKS 7 Introduction and objectives 7 Benchmarks performed 7 About the technologies involved 8 Automated infrastructure 9 // TRANSACTIONS BENCHMARK 12 Benchmark description 12 MongoDB transaction limitations 14 Discussion on transaction isolation levels 14 Benchmark results 17 // OLTP BENCHMARK 25 Benchmark description 25 Initial considerations 26 Benchmark results 29 // OLAP BENCHMARK 38 Benchmark description 38 Benchmark results 45 2/46 // ABOUT THIS BENCHMARK Introduction Benchmarking is hard. Benchmarking databases, harder. Benchmarking databases that follow different approaches (relational vs document) is even harder. There are many reasons why this is true, widely discussed in the industry. Notwithstanding all these difficulties, the market demands these kinds of benchmarks. Despite the different data models that MongoDB and PostgreSQL expose, many developers and organizations face a challenge when choosing between the platforms. And while they can be compared on many fronts, performance is undoubtedly one of the main differentiators — arguably the main one. How then do you leverage an informative benchmark so that decisions can be made about the choice of a given technology, while at the same time presenting a fair arena in which the technologies compete in an apples-to-apples scenario? To fulfill these goals, this benchmark has been executed based on the following criteria: • Transparency and reproducibility. The framework that has been programmed and used to run the benchmarks is fully automated and is published as open source.
    [Show full text]
  • Hyperledger Blockchain Performance Metrics
    Hyperledger Blockchain Performance Metrics ABOUT HYPERLEDGER About This Paper Hyperledger This is the first white paper from the Hyperledger Performance and Scale Working (http://hyperledger.org/) is Group (https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/pswg/performance-and-scale-wg). an open source effort created The purpose of this document is to define the basic terms and key metrics to advance cross-industry that should be used to evaluate the performance of a blockchain and then blockchain technologies. communicate the results. This paper also serves as a platform-agnostic resource It is a global collaboration for technical blockchain developers and managers interested in using industry- including leaders in banking, standard nomenclature. finance, Internet of Things, While we appreciate that there may be discrete definitions for the terms “blockchain” manufacturing, supply chains, and “Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT),” for the purposes of this paper we will and technology. The Linux treat both terms synonymously and use the term “blockchain” throughout. Foundation, the nonprofit organization enabling mass This document provides some guidance on selecting and evaluating workloads. innovation through open source, We expect that refinements to these definitions and new blockchain-specific hosts Hyperledger. The Linux metrics will warrant future revisions of this document. Foundation also enables a In future documents, the Working Group plans to discuss workloads in greater worldwide developer community detail and to offer additional guidance on standard procedures and emerging to work together and share best practices for evaluating blockchain performance. To provide your feedback ideas, infrastructure, and code. and stay informed about subsequent versions of this paper, please join us in the Performance and Scale Working Group (https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/ pswg/performance-and-scale-wg).
    [Show full text]
  • Administration Guide Version 10.0
    Oracle® GoldenGate for Mainframe Administration Guide Version 10.0 October 2009 Administration Guide, version 10.0 Copyright © 1995, 2009 Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. This software and related documentation are provided under a license agreement containing restrictions on use and disclosure and are protected by intellectual property laws. Except as expressly permitted in your license agreement or allowed by law, you may not use, copy, reproduce, translate, broadcast, modify, license, transmit, distribute, exhibit, perform, publish, or display any part, in any form, or by any means. Reverse engineering, disassembly, or decompilation of this software, unless required by law for interoperability, is prohibited. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice and is not warranted to be error-free. If you find any errors, please report them to us in writing. If this software or related documentation is delivered to the U.S. Government or anyone licensing it on behalf of the U.S. Government, the following notice is applicable: U.S. GOVERNMENT RIGHTS Programs, software, databases, and related documentation and technical data delivered to U.S. Government customers are "commercial computer software" or "commercial technical data" pursuant to the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation and agency-specific supplemental regulations. As such, the use, duplication, disclosure, modification, and adaptation shall be subject to the restrictions and license terms set forth in the applicable Government contract, and, to the extent applicable by the terms of the Government contract, the additional rights set forth in FAR 52.227-19, Commercial Computer Software License (December 2007). Oracle USA, Inc., 500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood City, CA 94065.
    [Show full text]