DOCSLIB.ORG

Cider: a Rapid Docker Container Deployment System Through Sharing Network Storage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cider: a Rapid Docker Container Deployment System Through Sharing Network Storage This is a repository copy of Cider: a Rapid Docker Container Deployment System through Sharing Network Storage. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/166907/ Version: Accepted Version Proceedings Paper: Du, L, Wo, T, Yang, R et al. (1 more author) (2018) Cider: a Rapid Docker Container Deployment System through Sharing Network Storage. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 15th International Conference on Smart City; IEEE 3rd International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS). 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 15th International Conference on Smart City; IEEE 3rd International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS), 18-20 Dec 2017, Bangkok, Thailand. IEEE , pp. 332-339. ISBN 978-1-5386-2589-7 https://doi.org/10.1109/hpcc-smartcity-dss.2017.44 © 2017 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Cider: a Rapid Docker Container Deployment System Through Sharing Network Storage Lian Du, Tianyu Wo, Renyu Yang*, Chunming Hu State Key Laboratory of Software Development Environment BDBC, Beihang University, Beijing, China Email: {dulian, woty, hucm}@act.buaa.edu.cn; [email protected]* Abstract — Container technology has been prevalent and sourced project Harbor [19] is an enterprise-class container widely-adopted in production environment considering the huge registry server and it also integrates the decentralized image benefits to application packing, deploying and management. distribution mechanism. However, application’s images still However, the deployment process is relatively slow by using need to be fully downloaded to worker nodes, resulting in an conventional approaches. In large-scale concurrent deployments, extended latency derived from transferring large amounts of resource contentions on the central image repository would data through local network. Harter et al. [18] propose a lazy aggravate such situation. In fact, it is observable that the image fetching strategy for container data on single node and the pulling operation is mainly responsible for the degraded method can effectively reduce the container provision time. performance. To this end, we propose Cider - a novel deployment Nevertheless, large-scale and concurrent deployment system to enable rapid container deployment in a high experiments have not yet been conducted, leading to concurrent and scalable manner at scale. Firstly, on-demand image data loading is proposed by altering the local Docker difficulties in validating their effectiveness and understanding storage of worker nodes into all-nodes-sharing network storage. their operational intricacies at scale. In reality, these scenarios Also, the local copy-on-write layer for containers can ensure are commonly-used and scalability bottleneck might manifest Cider to achieve the scalability whilst improving the cost- very frequently. Therefore, it is particularly desirable for a effectiveness during the holistic deployment. Experimental container deployment system to rapidly provision container results reveal that Cider can shorten the overall deployment time especially at large scale. by 85% and 62% on average when deploying one container and In this paper, we present Cider - an innovative deployment 100 concurrent containers respectively. system for Docker containers, which can enable rapid container Keywords — container; network storage; copy-on-write; deployment in a high concurrent and scalable manner. application deployment Specifically, we alter the local Docker storage of worker nodes into all-nodes-sharing network storage, allowing for on- demand image data loading when deploying containers. This I. INTRODUCTION approach can dramatically reduce the transferred data, thereby Recent years have witnessed the prosperity of container considerably accelerating the single container deployment. technique and Docker is undoubtedly the most representative Additionally, to achieve higher scalability and efficiency of among them [1]. Compared with virtual machine, container can memory usage, we design and implement a local copy-on-write provision performance and user-space isolation with extremely (COW) layer for setting-up containers. The approach assigns low virtualization overheads [2]. The deployment of concurrent COW request flooding in network storage into local applications (especially in large clusters) increasingly tends to worker nodes. Experimental results show that compared with depend on containers, driven by recent advances in packing conventional approach, Cider is able to shorten the average and orchestration. Massive-scale container deployment is deployment time by 85% in single container case. A 62% becoming increasingly important for micro-service compos- reduction can still be achieved when concurrently deploying ition and execution. Unfortunately, the enlarged system latency 100 containers, with no conspicuous runtime overheads. In introduced by slow container deployment is becoming a non- particular, the major contributions in this paper can be summa- negligible problem, which is critical in scenarios such as rized as follows: bursting traffic handling, fast system component failover etc. According to our in-depth investigation of conventional Introducing a rapid and cost-effective container deployment approaches, we found that the mean deployment deployment system based on sharing network storage, time of the top 69 images in Docker Hub is up to 13.4 seconds which can reduce the amount of transferred data during and 92% of the holistic time is consumed by transferring image the deployment. data through network. Even worse, in large-scale concurrent Combining network storage with the local file-level deployments, resource contentions on the central image COW layer to guarantee the system scalability and repository would aggravate such situation. memory efficiency in face of jobs of high concurrent To cope with slow container deployment and improve the deployment. launch efficiency, cluster management systems (such as Borg The remaining sections are structured as follows: Section II [12], Tupperware[13], Fuxi[25] etc.) adopt a P2P-based introduces the background and our motivation; Section III method to accelerate the package distribution. VMware open- node1 image in the worker node is managed by the storage driver such as metadata Aufs [3], Devicemapper [4], Overlay or Overlay2 [5]. After the image is pulled, the driver will setup another COW layer on local COW storage top of the image for the container. containers In effect, current deployment approaches [8] are far from 2. COW enough, especially in cases that highly require rapid nginx postgres deployments. To illustrate this phenomenon, we evaluate the debian deploy time of the top 69 images from Docker Hub [6] in node2 sequence (Images are ordered by pull times and the selected 1. pull images are pulled by more than 10 million times; the image size is 347 MB on average). The evaluation is actually registry image conducted through setting up a private registry and deploying metadata containers on another node which resides in the same LAN of the registry. The result demonstrates that the mean deploy time deploy nodeN image layers can be up to 13.4 seconds. Furthermore, there are a number of scenarios that require low deploy latency. For instance, services should scale-out instantly to tackle bursting traffic Fig. 1. Conventional container deployment architecture. whilst applications should recover as soon as possible upon the arrival of failover event to retain the system availability [26]. presents the core idea of design and implementation in Cider; Developers might intend to acquire the high efficiency and Section IV shows the experimental results and Section V productivity in Continuous Integration/Continuous discusses the related work; Finally, Section VI presents the Deployment work flow. All these requirements motivate us to conclusion followed by the discussion of future work. boost the performance of container deployment. II. BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION B. Deep Dive into Container Deployment Process Container technique has been widely adopted in the In order to investigate the root cause of slow deployment, production environment over a decade[12][13] as it provides we conduct a fine-grained analysis into the deployment several critical capabilities for large-scale
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How to Create a Custom Live CD for Secure Remote Incident Handling in the Enterprise
    How to Create a Custom Live CD for Secure Remote Incident Handling in the Enterprise Abstract This paper will document a process to create a custom Live CD for secure remote incident handling on Windows and Linux systems. The process will include how to configure SSH for remote access to the Live CD even when running behind a NAT device. The combination of customization and secure remote access will make this process valuable to incident handlers working in enterprise environments with limited remote IT support. Bert Hayes, [email protected] How to Create a Custom Live CD for Remote Incident Handling 2 Table of Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................5 2. Making Your Own Customized Debian GNU/Linux Based System........................................7 2.1. The Development Environment ......................................................................................7 2.2. Making Your Dream Incident Handling System...............................................................9 2.3. Hardening the Base Install.............................................................................................11 2.3.1. Managing Root Access with Sudo..........................................................................11 2.4. Randomizing the Handler Password at Boot Time ........................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of the Ideal Storage Configuration for Docker Containers
    In Search of the Ideal Storage Configuration for Docker Containers Vasily Tarasov1, Lukas Rupprecht1, Dimitris Skourtis1, Amit Warke1, Dean Hildebrand1 Mohamed Mohamed1, Nagapramod Mandagere1, Wenji Li2, Raju Rangaswami3, Ming Zhao2 1IBM Research—Almaden 2Arizona State University 3Florida International University Abstract—Containers are a widely successful technology today every running container. This would cause a great burden on popularized by Docker. Containers improve system utilization by the I/O subsystem and make container start time unacceptably increasing workload density. Docker containers enable seamless high for many workloads. As a result, copy-on-write (CoW) deployment of workloads across development, test, and produc- tion environments. Docker’s unique approach to data manage- storage and storage snapshots are popularly used and images ment, which involves frequent snapshot creation and removal, are structured in layers. A layer consists of a set of files and presents a new set of exciting challenges for storage systems. At layers with the same content can be shared across images, the same time, storage management for Docker containers has reducing the amount of storage required to run containers. remained largely unexplored with a dizzying array of solution With Docker, one can choose Aufs [6], Overlay2 [7], choices and configuration options. In this paper we unravel the multi-faceted nature of Docker storage and demonstrate its Btrfs [8], or device-mapper (dm) [9] as storage drivers which impact on system and workload performance. As we uncover provide the required snapshotting and CoW capabilities for new properties of the popular Docker storage drivers, this is a images. None of these solutions, however, were designed with sobering reminder that widespread use of new technologies can Docker in mind and their effectiveness for Docker has not been often precede their careful evaluation.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Performance of Container Execution Environments
    Understanding the performance of container execution environments Guillaume Everarts de Velp, Etienne Rivière and Ramin Sadre [email protected] EPL, ICTEAM, UCLouvain, Belgium Abstract example is an automatic grading platform named INGIn- Many application server backends leverage container tech- ious [2, 3]. This platform is used extensively at UCLouvain nologies to support workloads formed of short-lived, but and other institutions around the world to provide computer potentially I/O-intensive, operations. The latency at which science and engineering students with automated feedback container-supported operations complete impacts both the on programming assignments, through the execution of se- users’ experience and the throughput that the platform can ries of unit tests prepared by instructors. It is necessary that achieve. This latency is a result of both the bootstrap and the student code and the testing runtime run in isolation from execution time of the containers and is impacted greatly by each others. Containers answer this need perfectly: They the performance of the I/O subsystem. Configuring appro- allow students’ code to run in a controlled and reproducible priately the container environment and technology stack environment while reducing risks related to ill-behaved or to obtain good performance is not an easy task, due to the even malicious code. variety of options, and poor visibility on their interactions. Service latency is often the most important criteria for We present in this paper a benchmarking tool for the selecting a container execution environment. Slow response multi-parametric study of container bootstrap time and I/O times can impair the usability of an edge computing infras- performance, allowing us to understand such interactions tructure, or result in students frustration in the case of IN- within a controlled environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Container-Based Virtualization for Byte-Addressable NVM Data Storage
    2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) Container-Based Virtualization for Byte-Addressable NVM Data Storage Ellis R. Giles Rice University Houston, Texas [email protected] Abstract—Container based virtualization is rapidly growing Storage Class Memory, or SCM, is an exciting new in popularity for cloud deployments and applications as a memory technology with the potential of replacing hard virtualization alternative due to the ease of deployment cou- drives and SSDs as it offers high-speed, byte-addressable pled with high-performance. Emerging byte-addressable, non- volatile memories, commonly called Storage Class Memory or persistence on the main memory bus. Several technologies SCM, technologies are promising both byte-addressability and are currently under research and development, each with dif- persistence near DRAM speeds operating on the main memory ferent performance, durability, and capacity characteristics. bus. These new memory alternatives open up a new realm of These include a ReRAM by Micron and Sony, a slower, but applications that no longer have to rely on slow, block-based very large capacity Phase Change Memory or PCM by Mi- persistence, but can rather operate directly on persistent data using ordinary loads and stores through the cache hierarchy cron and others, and a fast, smaller spin-torque ST-MRAM coupled with transaction techniques. by Everspin. High-speed, byte-addressable persistence will However, SCM presents a new challenge for container-based give rise to new applications that no longer have to rely on applications, which typically access persistent data through slow, block based storage devices and to serialize data for layers of block based file isolation.
    [Show full text]
  • Ubuntu Server Guide Basic Installation Preparing to Install
    Ubuntu Server Guide Welcome to the Ubuntu Server Guide! This site includes information on using Ubuntu Server for the latest LTS release, Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (Focal Fossa). For an offline version as well as versions for previous releases see below. Improving the Documentation If you find any errors or have suggestions for improvements to pages, please use the link at thebottomof each topic titled: “Help improve this document in the forum.” This link will take you to the Server Discourse forum for the specific page you are viewing. There you can share your comments or let us know aboutbugs with any page. PDFs and Previous Releases Below are links to the previous Ubuntu Server release server guides as well as an offline copy of the current version of this site: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (Focal Fossa): PDF Ubuntu 18.04 LTS (Bionic Beaver): Web and PDF Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Xenial Xerus): Web and PDF Support There are a couple of different ways that the Ubuntu Server edition is supported: commercial support and community support. The main commercial support (and development funding) is available from Canonical, Ltd. They supply reasonably- priced support contracts on a per desktop or per-server basis. For more information see the Ubuntu Advantage page. Community support is also provided by dedicated individuals and companies that wish to make Ubuntu the best distribution possible. Support is provided through multiple mailing lists, IRC channels, forums, blogs, wikis, etc. The large amount of information available can be overwhelming, but a good search engine query can usually provide an answer to your questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Scibian 9 HPC Installation Guide
    Scibian 9 HPC Installation guide CCN-HPC Version 1.9, 2018-08-20 Table of Contents About this document . 1 Purpose . 2 Structure . 3 Typographic conventions . 4 Build dependencies . 5 License . 6 Authors . 7 Reference architecture. 8 1. Hardware architecture . 9 1.1. Networks . 9 1.2. Infrastructure cluster. 10 1.3. User-space cluster . 12 1.4. Storage system . 12 2. External services . 13 2.1. Base services. 13 2.2. Optional services . 14 3. Software architecture . 15 3.1. Overview . 15 3.2. Base Services . 16 3.3. Additional Services. 19 3.4. High-Availability . 20 4. Conventions . 23 5. Advanced Topics . 24 5.1. Boot sequence . 24 5.2. iPXE Bootmenu Generator. 28 5.3. Debian Installer Preseed Generator. 30 5.4. Frontend nodes: SSH load-balancing and high-availability . 31 5.5. Service nodes: DNS load-balancing and high-availability . 34 5.6. Consul and DNS integration. 35 5.7. Scibian diskless initrd . 37 Installation procedure. 39 6. Overview. 40 7. Requirements . 41 8. Temporary installation node . 44 8.1. Base installation . 44 8.2. Administration environment . 44 9. Internal configuration repository . 46 9.1. Base directories . 46 9.2. Organization settings . 46 9.3. Cluster directories . 48 9.4. Puppet configuration . 48 9.5. Cluster definition. 49 9.6. Service role . 55 9.7. Authentication and encryption keys . 56 10. Generic service nodes . 62 10.1. Temporary installation services . 62 10.2. First Run. 62 10.3. Second Run . 64 10.4. Base system installation. 64 10.5. Ceph deployment . 66 10.6. Consul deployment.
    [Show full text]
  • Xrac: Execution and Access Control for Restricted Application Containers on Managed Hosts
    xRAC: Execution and Access Control for Restricted Application Containers on Managed Hosts Frederik Hauser, Mark Schmidt, and Michael Menth Chair of Communication Networks, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany Email: {frederik.hauser,mark-thomas.schmidt,menth}@uni-tuebingen.de Abstract—We propose xRAC to permit users to run spe- or Internet access. That means, appropriate network control cial applications on managed hosts and to grant them access elements, e.g., firewalls or SDN controllers, may be informed to protected network resources. We use restricted application about authorized RACs and their needs. The authorized traffic containers (RACs) for that purpose. A RAC is a virtualization container with only a selected set of applications. Authentication can be identified by the RAC’s IPv6 address. We call this verifies the RAC user’s identity and the integrity of the RAC concept xRAC as it controls execution and access for RACs. image. If the user is permitted to use the RAC on a managed We mention a few use cases that may benefit from xRAC. host, launching the RAC is authorized and access to protected RACs may allow users to execute only up-to-date RAC network resources may be given, e.g., to internal networks, images. Execution of a RAC may be allowed only to special servers, or the Internet. xRAC simplifies traffic control as the traffic of a RAC has a unique IPv6 address so that it can users or user groups, e.g., to enforce license restrictions. be easily identified in the network. The architecture of xRAC Only selected users in a high-security area may get access to reuses standard technologies, protocols, and infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Run Ubuntu, Chromiumos, Android at the Same Time on an Embedded Device
    How to run Ubuntu, ChromiumOS, Android at the Same Time on an Embedded Device Grégoire Gentil Founder Always Innovating Embedded Linux Conference April 2011 Why should I stay and attend this talk? ● Very cool demos that you have never seen before! ● Win some USB dongles and USB-to-HDMI adapters (Display Link inside, $59 value)!!! ● Come in front rows, you will better see the Pandaboard demo on multiple screens Objective of the talk ● Learn how to run multiple operating systems... ● AIOS (Angstrom fork), Ubuntu Maverick, Android Gingerbread, ChromiumOS ● …on a single ARM device (Beagleboard-xM, Pandaboard)... ● …at the same time, natively, with zero performance loss... ● …connected to one or multiple monitors simultaneously!!!! Where does it come from? (1/2) ● Hardware is becoming so versatile Where does it come from? (2/2) ● Open source is so fragmented ● => “Single” (between quote) Linux but with different userspace stacks How do we do it? ● Obviously: chroot ● Key lesson of this talk: simple theoretically, difficult to implement it right ● Kind of Rubik's cube puzzle – When assembling a face, you destroy the others ● Key issues along the way – Making work the core OS – Problem of managing output (video) – Problem of managing all inputs (HID, network) => End-up patching everything in kernel and OS Live Demo ChromiumOS Android AIOS Beagleboard xM TI OMAP3 Ubuntu AIOS ChromiumOS Android Pandaboard TI OMAP4 Multiple OS running side-by-side ● One kernel, multiple ARM native root file systems ● Hot-switchable at runtime ● Much faster than a usual virtual machine architecture AIOS Android Ubuntu Chromium Gentoo rootfs rootfs rootfs rootfs rootfs ..
    [Show full text]
  • Union Mounts
    Union mounts http://valerieaurora.org/union/ Valerie Aurora Red Hat, Inc. <[email protected]> Overview ● The problem ● Existing solutions ● Union mounts ● Why not unionfs? ● Limitations of unionfs ● What you can do ● How to take over the world with union mounts and Puppet What's the problem? ● Lots of nearly identical root file systems ● Virtual machines ● Any cluster ● LiveCD ● Could we share some of these? Ways to share file systems ● Copy-on-write (COW) block devices ● NFS-exported root file system ● Other network/cluster file systems ● Snapshots Why do we need union mounts? ● COW block device inefficient, divergent ● NFS server gets overloaded ● Cluster file system is needlessly heavyweight ● Snapshots are limited to a single system Solution: file-level sharing ● Take one read-only file system (shared) ● Add one local writable file system ● Lookups “fall through” to lower read-only fs ● Writes go to topmost writable fs ● Writes to lower fs trigger copy-up to topmost fs Sounds like... unionfs ● Unionfs and aufs panic the kernel ● Unionfs architecture is fundamentally broken ● Al Viro's canonical explanation here: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0802.0/0839.html ● University research project ● Unmerged for 7 years and counting Why union mounts is different ● Implemented in the VFS ● Designed with help of VFS maintainers ● Many fewer features Limitations of union mounts ● open(O_RDONLY) gets you a different file from open (O_RDWR) ● fchmod()/fchown()/futimensat() on fd don't work ● Only one writable layer ● Requires on-disk format changes to topmost fs What you can do ● Use open(O_RDONLY) ● Don't use fchmod()/fchown()/futimensat() on fd ● Don't access same file from multiple fds ● Let your engineers work on union mounts ● Review ● Test ● http://valerieaurora.org/union/ Puppet + Union mounts = World Domination Thank you Jan Blunck Miklos Szeredi Felix Fietkau Al Viro Erez Zadok Christoph Hellwig J.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Events in Container Storage
    Current Events in Container Storage Keith Hudgins Docker 2019 Storage Developer Conference. © Docker, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 1 Container Community Orgs ▪ Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) ▪ https://www.cncf.io/ ▪ Open Container Initiative (OCI) ▪ https://www.opencontainers.org/ ▪ Both are part of the Linux Foundation ▪ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/ 2019 Storage Developer Conference. © Docker, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 2 Container Runtimes ▪ Docker ▪ Default for most container installs, widest user base ▪ 20 million+ Docker Community Engine installs alone ▪ Containerd ▪ Fully graduated CNCF project (as of Feb 2019) ▪ Windows and Linux container runtime ▪ Upstream of Docker (for Linux, anyway) ▪ CoreOS (rkt) ▪ CoreOS acquired by RedHat May 2018 ▪ rkt archived by CNCF as of 8/16/2019 ▪ CRI-O ▪ Default runtime for RH OpenShift as of 4.0, June 2019 ▪ Intended to be Kubernetes-native runtime ▪ Fully open-source ▪ Upstream of these projects* are CNCF efforts. *Docker has non-CNCF upstream 3 2019 Storage Developer Conference. © Docker, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Components as well Container Storage Lifecycle 2019 Storage Developer Conference. © Docker, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 4 Container Storage Lifecycle (cont) ▪ Containers use storage in 3 primary contexts: ▪ Raw container image ▪ At rest, either as a file on disk or object storage ▪ At runtime ▪ One of several graph drivers ▪ These are NOT persistent ▪ Persistent storage ▪ Volumes attached to containers for persistent data ▪ Most of this talk will focus on this type of storage
    [Show full text]
  • Sibylfs: Formal Specification and Oracle-Based Testing for POSIX and Real-World File Systems
    SibylFS: formal specification and oracle-based testing for POSIX and real-world file systems Tom Ridge1 David Sheets2 Thomas Tuerk3 Andrea Giugliano1 Anil Madhavapeddy2 Peter Sewell2 1University of Leicester 2University of Cambridge 3FireEye http://sibylfs.io/ Abstract 1. Introduction Systems depend critically on the behaviour of file systems, Problem File systems, in common with several other key but that behaviour differs in many details, both between systems components, have some well-known but challeng- implementations and between each implementation and the ing properties: POSIX (and other) prose specifications. Building robust and portable software requires understanding these details and differences, but there is currently no good way to system- • they provide behaviourally complex abstractions; atically describe, investigate, or test file system behaviour • there are many important file system implementations, across this complex multi-platform interface. each with its own internal complexities; In this paper we show how to characterise the envelope • different file systems, while broadly similar, nevertheless of allowed behaviour of file systems in a form that enables behave quite differently in some cases; and practical and highly discriminating testing. We give a math- • other system software and applications often must be ematically rigorous model of file system behaviour, SibylFS, written to be portable between file systems, and file sys- that specifies the range of allowed behaviours of a file sys- tems themselves are sometimes ported from one OS to tem for any sequence of the system calls within our scope, another, or written to support application portability. and that can be used as a test oracle to decide whether an ob- served trace is allowed by the model, both for validating the File system behaviour, and especially these variations in be- model and for testing file systems against it.
    [Show full text]
  • A NAS Integrated File System for On-Site Iot Data Storage
    A NAS Integrated File System for On-site IoT Data Storage Yuki Okamoto1 Kenichi Arai2 Toru Kobayashi2 Takuya Fujihashi1 Takashi Watanabe1 Shunsuke Saruwatari1 1Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, Osaka University, Japan 2Graduate School of Engineering, Nagasaki University, Japan Abstract—In the case of IoT data acquisition, long-term storage SDFS, multiple NAS can be handled as one file system and of large amounts of sensor data is a significant challenge. When a users can easily add new NAS. cloud service is used, fixed costs such as a communication line for The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In uploading and a monthly fee are unavoidable. In addition, the use of large-capacity storage servers incurs high initial installation section 2, we discuss the issues associated with the sensor data costs. In this paper, we propose a Network Attached Storage storage. Section 3 describes the overview and implementation (NAS) integrated file system called the “Sensor Data File System of the proposed file system, SDFS. In section 4, we evaluate (SDFS)”, which has advantages of being on-site, low-cost, and the performance of SDFS and existing file systems. Section 5 highly scalable. We developed the SDFS using FUSE, which introduces related work, and Section 6 summarizes the main is an interface for implementing file systems in user-space. In this work, we compared SDFS with existing integrated storage findings of this paper. modalities such as aufs and unionfs-fuse. The results indicate that II. ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SENSOR DATA STORAGE SDFS achieves an equivalent throughput compared with existing file systems in terms of read/write performance.
    [Show full text]