LSM-Tree Database Storage Engine Serving Facebook's Social Graph
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
NUMA-Aware Thread Migration for High Performance NVMM File Systems
NUMA-Aware Thread Migration for High Performance NVMM File Systems Ying Wang, Dejun Jiang and Jin Xiong SKL Computer Architecture, ICT, CAS; University of Chinese Academy of Sciences fwangying01, jiangdejun, [email protected] Abstract—Emerging Non-Volatile Main Memories (NVMMs) out considering the NVMM usage on NUMA nodes. Besides, provide persistent storage and can be directly attached to the application threads accessing file system rely on the default memory bus, which allows building file systems on non-volatile operating system thread scheduler, which migrates thread only main memory (NVMM file systems). Since file systems are built on memory, NUMA architecture has a large impact on their considering CPU utilization. These bring remote memory performance due to the presence of remote memory access and access and resource contentions to application threads when imbalanced resource usage. Existing works migrate thread and reading and writing files, and thus reduce the performance thread data on DRAM to solve these problems. Unlike DRAM, of NVMM file systems. We observe that when performing NVMM introduces extra latency and lifetime limitations. This file reads/writes from 4 KB to 256 KB on a NVMM file results in expensive data migration for NVMM file systems on NUMA architecture. In this paper, we argue that NUMA- system (NOVA [47] on NVMM), the average latency of aware thread migration without migrating data is desirable accessing remote node increases by 65.5 % compared to for NVMM file systems. We propose NThread, a NUMA-aware accessing local node. The average bandwidth is reduced by thread migration module for NVMM file system. -
Data Platforms Map from 451 Research
1 2 3 4 5 6 Azure AgilData Cloudera Distribu2on HDInsight Metascale of Apache Kaa MapR Streams MapR Hortonworks Towards Teradata Listener Doopex Apache Spark Strao enterprise search Apache Solr Google Cloud Confluent/Apache Kaa Al2scale Qubole AWS IBM Azure DataTorrent/Apache Apex PipelineDB Dataproc BigInsights Apache Lucene Apache Samza EMR Data Lake IBM Analy2cs for Apache Spark Oracle Stream Explorer Teradata Cloud Databricks A Towards SRCH2 So\ware AG for Hadoop Oracle Big Data Cloud A E-discovery TIBCO StreamBase Cloudera Elas2csearch SQLStream Data Elas2c Found Apache S4 Apache Storm Rackspace Non-relaonal Oracle Big Data Appliance ObjectRocket for IBM InfoSphere Streams xPlenty Apache Hadoop HP IDOL Elas2csearch Google Azure Stream Analy2cs Data Ar2sans Apache Flink Azure Cloud EsgnDB/ zone Platforms Oracle Dataflow Endeca Server Search AWS Apache Apache IBM Ac2an Treasure Avio Kinesis LeanXcale Trafodion Splice Machine MammothDB Drill Presto Big SQL Vortex Data SciDB HPCC AsterixDB IBM InfoSphere Towards LucidWorks Starcounter SQLite Apache Teradata Map Data Explorer Firebird Apache Apache JethroData Pivotal HD/ Apache Cazena CitusDB SIEM Big Data Tajo Hive Impala Apache HAWQ Kudu Aster Loggly Ac2an Ingres Sumo Cloudera SAP Sybase ASE IBM PureData January 2016 Logic Search for Analy2cs/dashDB Logentries SAP Sybase SQL Anywhere Key: B TIBCO Splunk Maana Rela%onal zone B LogLogic EnterpriseDB SQream General purpose Postgres-XL Microso\ Ry\ X15 So\ware Oracle IBM SAP SQL Server Oracle Teradata Specialist analy2c PostgreSQL Exadata -
Accordion: Better Memory Organization for LSM Key-Value Stores
Accordion: Better Memory Organization for LSM Key-Value Stores Edward Bortnikov Anastasia Braginsky Eshcar Hillel Yahoo Research Yahoo Research Yahoo Research [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Idit Keidar Gali Sheffi Technion and Yahoo Research Yahoo Research [email protected] gsheffi@oath.com ABSTRACT of applications for which they are used continuously in- Log-structured merge (LSM) stores have emerged as the tech- creases. A small sample of recently published use cases in- nology of choice for building scalable write-intensive key- cludes massive-scale online analytics (Airbnb/ Airstream [2], value storage systems. An LSM store replaces random I/O Yahoo/Flurry [7]), product search and recommendation (Al- with sequential I/O by accumulating large batches of writes ibaba [13]), graph storage (Facebook/Dragon [5], Pinter- in a memory store prior to flushing them to log-structured est/Zen [19]), and many more. disk storage; the latter is continuously re-organized in the The leading approach for implementing write-intensive background through a compaction process for efficiency of key-value storage is log-structured merge (LSM) stores [31]. reads. Though inherent to the LSM design, frequent com- This technology is ubiquitously used by popular key-value pactions are a major pain point because they slow down storage platforms [9, 14, 16, 22,4,1, 10, 11]. The premise data store operations, primarily writes, and also increase for using LSM stores is the major disk access bottleneck, disk wear. Another performance bottleneck in today's state- exhibited even with today's SSD hardware [14, 33, 34]. -
Unravel Data Systems Version 4.5
UNRAVEL DATA SYSTEMS VERSION 4.5 Component name Component version name License names jQuery 1.8.2 MIT License Apache Tomcat 5.5.23 Apache License 2.0 Tachyon Project POM 0.8.2 Apache License 2.0 Apache Directory LDAP API Model 1.0.0-M20 Apache License 2.0 apache/incubator-heron 0.16.5.1 Apache License 2.0 Maven Plugin API 3.0.4 Apache License 2.0 ApacheDS Authentication Interceptor 2.0.0-M15 Apache License 2.0 Apache Directory LDAP API Extras ACI 1.0.0-M20 Apache License 2.0 Apache HttpComponents Core 4.3.3 Apache License 2.0 Spark Project Tags 2.0.0-preview Apache License 2.0 Curator Testing 3.3.0 Apache License 2.0 Apache HttpComponents Core 4.4.5 Apache License 2.0 Apache Commons Daemon 1.0.15 Apache License 2.0 classworlds 2.4 Apache License 2.0 abego TreeLayout Core 1.0.1 BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License jackson-core 2.8.6 Apache License 2.0 Lucene Join 6.6.1 Apache License 2.0 Apache Commons CLI 1.3-cloudera-pre-r1439998 Apache License 2.0 hive-apache 0.5 Apache License 2.0 scala-parser-combinators 1.0.4 BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License com.springsource.javax.xml.bind 2.1.7 Common Development and Distribution License 1.0 SnakeYAML 1.15 Apache License 2.0 JUnit 4.12 Common Public License 1.0 ApacheDS Protocol Kerberos 2.0.0-M12 Apache License 2.0 Apache Groovy 2.4.6 Apache License 2.0 JGraphT - Core 1.2.0 (GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later AND Eclipse Public License 1.0) chill-java 0.5.0 Apache License 2.0 Apache Commons Logging 1.2 Apache License 2.0 OpenCensus 0.12.3 Apache License 2.0 ApacheDS Protocol -
Artificial Intelligence for Understanding Large and Complex
Artificial Intelligence for Understanding Large and Complex Datacenters by Pengfei Zheng Department of Computer Science Duke University Date: Approved: Benjamin C. Lee, Advisor Bruce M. Maggs Jeffrey S. Chase Jun Yang Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Computer Science in the Graduate School of Duke University 2020 Abstract Artificial Intelligence for Understanding Large and Complex Datacenters by Pengfei Zheng Department of Computer Science Duke University Date: Approved: Benjamin C. Lee, Advisor Bruce M. Maggs Jeffrey S. Chase Jun Yang An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Computer Science in the Graduate School of Duke University 2020 Copyright © 2020 by Pengfei Zheng All rights reserved except the rights granted by the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Licence Abstract As the democratization of global-scale web applications and cloud computing, under- standing the performance of a live production datacenter becomes a prerequisite for making strategic decisions related to datacenter design and optimization. Advances in monitoring, tracing, and profiling large, complex systems provide rich datasets and establish a rigorous foundation for performance understanding and reasoning. But the sheer volume and complexity of collected data challenges existing techniques, which rely heavily on human intervention, expert knowledge, and simple statistics. In this dissertation, we address this challenge using artificial intelligence and make the case for two important problems, datacenter performance diagnosis and datacenter workload characterization. The first thrust of this dissertation is the use of statistical causal inference and Bayesian probabilistic model for datacenter straggler diagnosis. -
Learning Key-Value Store Design
Learning Key-Value Store Design Stratos Idreos, Niv Dayan, Wilson Qin, Mali Akmanalp, Sophie Hilgard, Andrew Ross, James Lennon, Varun Jain, Harshita Gupta, David Li, Zichen Zhu Harvard University ABSTRACT We introduce the concept of design continuums for the data Key-Value Stores layout of key-value stores. A design continuum unifies major Machine Databases K V K V … K V distinct data structure designs under the same model. The Table critical insight and potential long-term impact is that such unifying models 1) render what we consider up to now as Learning Data Structures fundamentally different data structures to be seen as \views" B-Tree Table of the very same overall design space, and 2) allow \seeing" Graph LSM new data structure designs with performance properties that Store Hash are not feasible by existing designs. The core intuition be- hind the construction of design continuums is that all data Performance structures arise from the very same set of fundamental de- Update sign principles, i.e., a small set of data layout design con- Data Trade-offs cepts out of which we can synthesize any design that exists Access Patterns in the literature as well as new ones. We show how to con- Hardware struct, evaluate, and expand, design continuums and we also Cloud costs present the first continuum that unifies major data structure Read Memory designs, i.e., B+tree, Btree, LSM-tree, and LSH-table. Figure 1: From performance trade-offs to data structures, The practical benefit of a design continuum is that it cre- key-value stores and rich applications. -
Characterizing, Modeling, and Benchmarking Rocksdb Key-Value
Characterizing, Modeling, and Benchmarking RocksDB Key-Value Workloads at Facebook Zhichao Cao, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, and Facebook; Siying Dong and Sagar Vemuri, Facebook; David H.C. Du, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast20/presentation/cao-zhichao This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 18th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST ’20) February 25–27, 2020 • Santa Clara, CA, USA 978-1-939133-12-0 Open access to the Proceedings of the 18th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST ’20) is sponsored by Characterizing, Modeling, and Benchmarking RocksDB Key-Value Workloads at Facebook Zhichao Cao†‡ Siying Dong‡ Sagar Vemuri‡ David H.C. Du† †University of Minnesota, Twin Cities ‡Facebook Abstract stores is still challenging. First, there are very limited studies of real-world workload characterization and analysis for KV- Persistent key-value stores are widely used as building stores, and the performance of KV-stores is highly related blocks in today’s IT infrastructure for managing and storing to the workloads generated by applications. Second, the an- large amounts of data. However, studies of characterizing alytic methods for characterizing KV-store workloads are real-world workloads for key-value stores are limited due to different from the existing workload characterization stud- the lack of tracing/analyzing tools and the difficulty of collect- ies for block storage or file systems. KV-stores have simple ing traces in operational environments. In this paper, we first but very different interfaces and behaviors. A set of good present a detailed characterization of workloads from three workload collection, analysis, and characterization tools can typical RocksDB production use cases at Facebook: UDB (a benefit both developers and users of KV-stores by optimizing MySQL storage layer for social graph data), ZippyDB (a dis- performance and developing new functions. -
Myrocks in Mariadb
MyRocks in MariaDB Sergei Petrunia <[email protected]> MariaDB Shenzhen Meetup November 2017 2 What is MyRocks ● #include <Yoshinori’s talk> ● This talk is about MyRocks in MariaDB 3 MyRocks lives in Facebook’s MySQL branch ● github.com/facebook/mysql-5.6 – Will call this “FB/MySQL” ● MyRocks lives there in storage/rocksdb ● FB/MySQL is easy to use if you are Facebook ● Not so easy if you are not :-) 4 FB/mysql-5.6 – user perspective ● No binaries, no packages – Compile yourself from source ● Dependencies, etc. ● No releases – (Is the latest git revision ok?) ● Has extra features – e.g. extra counters “confuse” monitoring tools. 5 FB/mysql-5.6 – dev perspective ● Targets a CentOS-type OS – Compiler, cmake version, etc. – Others may or may not [periodically] work ● MariaDB/Percona file pull requests to fix ● Special command to compile – https://github.com/facebook/mysql-5.6/wiki/Build-Steps ● Special command to run tests – Test suite assumes a big machine ● Some tests even a release build 6 Putting MyRocks in MariaDB ● Goals – Wider adoption – Ease of use – Ease of development – Have MyRocks in MariaDB ● Use it with MariaDB features ● Means – Port MyRocks into MariaDB – Provide binaries and packages 7 Status of MyRocks in MariaDB 8 Status of MyRocks in MariaDB ● MariaDB 10.2 is GA (as of May, 2017) ● It includes an ALPHA version of MyRocks plugin – Working to improve maturity ● It’s a loadable plugin (ha_rocksdb.so) ● Packages – Bintar, deb, rpm, win64 zip + MSI – deb/rpm have MyRocks .so and tools in a separate package. 9 Packaging for MyRocks in MariaDB 10 MyRocks and RocksDB library ● MyRocks is tied RocksDB@revno MariaDB – RocksDB is a github submodule – No compatibility with other versions MyRocks ● RocksDB is always compiled with RocksDB MyRocks S Z n ● l i And linked-in statically a b p ● p Distros have a RocksDB package y – Not using it. -
Dmon: Efficient Detection and Correction of Data Locality
DMon: Efficient Detection and Correction of Data Locality Problems Using Selective Profiling Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Ian Neal, University of Michigan; Gilles Pokam, Intel Corporation; Barzan Mozafari and Baris Kasikci, University of Michigan https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi21/presentation/khan This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 15th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation. July 14–16, 2021 978-1-939133-22-9 Open access to the Proceedings of the 15th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation is sponsored by USENIX. DMon: Efficient Detection and Correction of Data Locality Problems Using Selective Profiling Tanvir Ahmed Khan Ian Neal Gilles Pokam Barzan Mozafari University of Michigan University of Michigan Intel Corporation University of Michigan Baris Kasikci University of Michigan Abstract cally at run time. In fact, as we (§6.2) and others [2,15,20,27] Poor data locality hurts an application’s performance. While demonstrate, compiler-based techniques can sometimes even compiler-based techniques have been proposed to improve hurt performance when the assumptions made by those heuris- data locality, they depend on heuristics, which can sometimes tics do not hold in practice. hurt performance. Therefore, developers typically find data To overcome the limitations of static optimizations, the locality issues via dynamic profiling and repair them manually. systems community has invested substantial effort in devel- Alas, existing profiling techniques incur high overhead when oping dynamic profiling tools [28,38, 57,97, 102]. Dynamic used to identify data locality problems and cannot be deployed profilers are capable of gathering detailed and more accurate in production, where programs may exhibit previously-unseen execution information, which a developer can use to identify performance problems. -
Real-Time LSM-Trees for HTAP Workloads
Real-Time LSM-Trees for HTAP Workloads Hemant Saxena Lukasz Golab University of Waterloo University of Waterloo [email protected] [email protected] Stratos Idreos Ihab F. Ilyas Harvard University University of Waterloo [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT We observe that a Log-Structured Merge (LSM) Tree is a natu- Real-time data analytics systems such as SAP HANA, MemSQL, ral fit for a lifecycle-aware storage engine. LSM-Trees are widely and IBM Wildfire employ hybrid data layouts, in which dataare used in key-value stores (e.g., Google’s BigTable and LevelDB, Cas- stored in different formats throughout their lifecycle. Recent data sandra, Facebook’s RocksDB), RDBMSs (e.g., Facebook’s MyRocks, are stored in a row-oriented format to serve OLTP workloads and SQLite4), blockchains (e.g., Hyperledger uses LevelDB), and data support high data rates, while older data are transformed to a stream and time-series databases (e.g., InfluxDB). While Cassandra column-oriented format for OLAP access patterns. We observe that and RocksDB can simulate columnar storage via column families, a Log-Structured Merge (LSM) Tree is a natural fit for a lifecycle- we are not aware of any lifecycle-aware LSM-Trees in which the aware storage engine due to its high write throughput and level- storage layout can change throughout the lifetime of the data. We oriented structure, in which records propagate from one level to fill this gap in our work, by extending the capabilities ofLSM- the next over time. To build a lifecycle-aware storage engine using based systems to efficiently serve real-time analytics and HTAP an LSM-Tree, we make a crucial modification to allow different workloads. -
In Mysql/Mariadb?
T h e O W A S P F o u n d a t i o n h t t p : / / w w w . o w a s p . o r g O W A S P E U T o u r B u c h a Do you r e s“GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES” t ... in MySQL/MariaDB? 2 0 1 DevOps Engineer 3 Gabriel PREDA [email protected] @eRadical Co pyr igh t © Th e O W AS P Fo un dat ion Per mi ssi on is gr ant ed to co py, dis tri bu te an d/ or mo dif y thi s do cu me nt un de r the ter ms of the O W AS P Lic en se. 2 DevOps = new BORG DevOps Engineer ??? ● Development – Web Applications (“Certified MySQL Associate”, “Zend Certified Engineer”) – Real Time Analytics ● Operations – MySQL DBA (15+ instances) – Sysadmin (<25 virtual & physical servers) 3 My MySQL● Over 15 MariaDB / TokuDBMariaDB(s) instances ● Statistics in MariaDB – < 1TB from Oct 2012 – < 12G raw data daily – < 12,000,000 events processed daily – < 90,000,000 rows added daily BigData? NO!!! ● I can copy all of that to my laptop ● “Working data set” - less than 1G & less than 7,500,000 rows 4 MySQL History ● 1983 – first version of MySQL created by Monty Wideniuns ● 1994 – MySQL is released OpenSource ● 2004 Oct – MySQL 4.1 GA ● 2005 Oct – InnoDB (Innobase) is bought by Oracle – Black Friday ● 2008 Ian – MySQL AB is bought by Sun (1bn $) ● 2008 Nov – MySQL 5.1 GA ● 2009 Apr – Sun is bought by Oracle (7,4 bn $) ● 2010 Dec – MySQL 5.5 GA ● 2012 Apr – MariaDB 5.5 GA ● 2013 Feb – MySQL 5.6 – first version made by Oracle ● 2013 Feb – MySQL will be replaced by MariaDB in Fedora & OpenSuSE * Max Mether – SkySQL “MySQL and MariaDB: Past, Present and Future” 5 Where are we NOW()? Drizzle MySQL TokuDB (Oracle) (Tokutek) Percona Server (Percona) MariaDB (Monty Program, Brighthouse MariaDB Foundation) (Infobright) Replication: ● Asynchronous InfiniDB ● Semi-synchronous (Calpont) ● Galera Synchronous (Codership) ● Tungsten Replication (Continuent) 6 Elementary.. -
Myrocks Deployment at Facebook and Roadmaps
MyRocks deployment at Facebook and Roadmaps Yoshinori Matsunobu Production Engineer / MySQL Tech Lead, Facebook Feb/2018, #FOSDEM #mysqldevroom Agenda ▪ MySQL at Facebook ▪ MyRocks overview ▪ Production Deployment ▪ Future Plans MySQL “User Database (UDB)” at Facebook▪ Storing Social Graph ▪ Massively Sharded ▪ Low latency ▪ Automated Operations ▪ Pure Flash Storage (Constrained by space, not by CPU/IOPS) What is MyRocks ▪ MySQL on top of RocksDB (RocksDB storage engine) ▪ Open Source, distributed from MariaDB and Percona as well MySQL Clients SQL/Connector Parser Optimizer Replication etc InnoDB RocksDB MySQL http://myrocks.io/ MyRocks Initial Goal at Facebook InnoDB in main database MyRocks in main database CPU IO Space CPU IO Space Machine limit Machine limit 45% 90% 21% 15% 45% 20% 15% 21% 15% MyRocks features ▪ Clustered Index (same as InnoDB) ▪ Bloom Filter and Column Family ▪ Transactions, including consistency between binlog and RocksDB ▪ Faster data loading, deletes and replication ▪ Dynamic Options ▪ TTL ▪ Online logical and binary backup MyRocks vs InnoDB ▪ MyRocks pros ▪ Much smaller space (half compared to compressed InnoDB) ▪ Gives better cache hit rate ▪ Writes are faster = Faster Replication ▪ Much smaller bytes written (can use more afordable fash storage) ▪ MyRocks cons (improvements in progress) ▪ Lack of several features ▪ No SBR, Gap Lock, Foreign Key, Fulltext Index, Spatial Index support. Need to use case sensitive collation for perf ▪ Reads are slower, especially if your data fts in memory ▪ More dependent on flesystem