DOCSLIB.ORG

COMP520-12C Final Report Nomadfs a Block

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COMP520-12C Final Report Nomadfs a Block COMP520-12C Final Report NomadFS A block migrating distributed file system Samuel Weston This report is in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Computing and Mathematical Sciences with Honours (BCMS(Hons)) at The University of Waikato. ©2012 Samuel Weston Abstract A distributed file system is a file system that is spread across multiple ma- chines. This report describes the block-based distributed file system NomadFS. NomadFS is designed for small scale distributed settings, such as those that exist in computer laboratories and cluster computers. It implements features, such as caching and block migration, which are aimed at improving the perfor- mance of shared data in such a setting. This report includes a discussion of the design and implementation of No- madFS, including relevant background. It also includes performance measure- ments, such as scalability. 2 Acknowledgements I would like to thank all the friendly members of the WAND network research group. This especially includes my supervisor Tony McGregor who has provided me with a massive amount of help over the year. Thanks! On a personal level I have enjoyed developing NomadFS and have learnt a great deal as a consequence of this development. This learning includes improv- ing my C programming ability, both in user space and kernel space (initially NomadFS was planned to be developed as a kernel space file system). I have also learnt a large amount about file systems and operating systems in general. 3 nomad /'n@Umæd/ noun member of tribe roaming from place to place for pasture; 4 Contents 1 Introduction 11 2 Background 13 2.1 A file system overview . 13 2.1.1 System calls . 15 2.2 Distributed systems . 17 2.2.1 Communication . 18 2.2.2 Synchronisation and Consistency . 18 2.2.3 Fault Tolerance . 18 2.2.4 Performance . 19 2.2.5 Scalability . 19 2.2.6 Transparency . 19 2.3 The Linux Virtual File System . 19 2.4 Filesystem in Userspace . 20 2.5 Summary . 21 3 Goals 22 4 File System Survey 24 4.1 Network File System (NFS) . 24 4.2 Gluster File System (GlusterFS) . 25 4.3 Google File System . 25 4.4 Zebra and RAID . 26 4.5 Summary . 27 5 Design 28 5.1 Overview . 28 5.2 Block interface . 29 5.2.1 Block-based approach . 29 5.2.2 Identification and locality . 30 5 5.3 File system structure . 30 5.3.1 Communication API . 31 5.4 Performance and Reliability . 32 5.4.1 Cache . 33 5.4.2 Synchronisation . 34 5.4.3 Block Mobility and Migration . 35 5.4.4 Block Allocation . 35 5.4.5 Prefetching . 36 5.4.6 Scalability . 36 5.5 Summary . 36 6 Implementation 37 6.1 Clients and Block Servers . 38 6.1.1 Client . 38 6.1.2 Block Server . 40 6.1.3 Locality and Client start up . 40 6.2 Communication . 41 6.2.1 Transport Protocol . 41 6.2.2 Messages . 41 6.2.3 Common Client and Server Communication . 42 6.2.4 Client Network Queue . 42 6.2.5 Overlapped IO . 43 6.2.6 Block server specific communication . 44 6.3 Synchronisation . 44 6.3.1 Distributed Synchronisation . 44 6.3.2 Internal Synchronisation . 45 6.4 Cache . 46 6.4.1 Cache coherency . 46 6.5 Block migration . 47 6.6 Aggressive Prefetching . 48 6.7 Issues and Challenges . 48 6.8 Summary . 48 7 Evaluation 49 7.1 Test Environment . 49 7.2 Migration . 50 7.3 Scalability . 51 7.4 Effect of block size on performance . 53 7.5 NFS Comparison . 54 6 7.6 IOZone . 54 7.7 Summary . 57 8 Conclusions and Future Work 58 8.1 Summary . 58 8.2 Conclusion . 58 8.3 Future Work . 59 8.3.1 Potential Extensions . 59 8.4 Final Words . 60 Bibliography 62 A Performance analysis scripts 64 B NomadFS current quirks 66 C IOZone benchmark results 68 D Configuration file format for NomadFS 70 E NomadFS source code listing 71 7 List of Figures 2.1 A file system . 13 2.2 File system layout on block abstraction (not to scale) . 14 2.3 Inode structure including indirection blocks . 14 2.4 A distributed file system . 17 2.5 VFS flow example. A user space write system call passes through the VFS and reaches the required file system write function. Adapted from Fig. 13.2 [11]. 20 5.1 High Level Architecture . 28 5.2 Client to server link . 29 5.3 Block and inode identifier . 30 5.4 Message passing . 31 5.5 File based cache invalidation . 34 6.1 Client Architecture . 38 6.2 Message layout in NomadFS (Data Block not to scale) . 41 6.3 Network queueing . 43 6.4 Overlapped IO (Adapted from Figure 2.4 [12]) . 43 6.5 Synchronisation . 45 6.6 Buffer Cache (Adapted from Fig. 5-20 [20]) . 46 6.7 Migration flow . 47 7.1 Test Environment . 50 7.2 Migration Performance . 51 7.3 Scalability on file smaller than cache . 52 7.4 Scalability on file larger than cache . 52 7.5 Affect of block size on performance . 53 7.6 IOZone Write . 55 7.7 IOZone Random Write . 55 7.8 IOZone Read . 56 8 7.9 IOZone Random Read . 56 9 Acronyms API Application Programming Interface. FUSE Filesystem in Userspace. LFS Log-Structured File System. NFS Network File System. RAID Redundant Array of Individual Disks. VFS Virtual File System. 10 Chapter 1 Introduction Multiple computer systems such as cluster computers and computer laboratories generally have a large amount of aggregate storage, due to each machine having its own `small' hard disk drive. As opposed to making use of the combined storage and performance capabilities of these `small' disks, a common approach to shared data in these systems is to use a single centralised storage system. A distributed file system which can take advantage of these storage and per- formance capabilities would help to improve the usefulness of shared data in a small scale distributed settings. This report covers the design and implementation of NomadFS, a new, pri- marily block-based distributed file system for the Linux environment. NomadFS is aimed at meeting the needs of smaller scale distributed environments. From a user's standpoint, performance is important. Because of this NomadFS has built in functionality which allows maximal usage of the machine's local disk. This includes preferring the local disk when creating data and allowing data to migrate to the disks of machines which use it the most. So that goals such as migration could be implemented and tested, common distributed file system functionalities such as fault tolerance through replication were not deemed a priority in this research. When approaching this problem there were a number of options available on how to implement such a file system. Firstly a decision was needed on whether the underlying architecture would operate on blocks or files. A block-based approach refers to the ability for the file system to operate directly on top of a block device while a file-based approach means that the file system relies on some form of underlying file architecture. For reasons that are explained in Chapter 5, a block-based approach, with some file based elements, was chosen for NomadFS. 11 Chapter 2 contains background file system information. This includes a background to file systems, block-based file systems and distributed systems. An understanding of these topics is required to fully understand this project. Chapter 3 contains the set of goals which NomadFS aimed to meet. Distributed file systems are not a new topic in Computer Science, it is therefore necessary that some related implementations are surveyed. This file system survey can be found in Chapter 4. The design and implementation of NomadFS are central to this project and are covered in Chapters 5 and 6. Chapter 5 overviews the design of NomadFS, and why these design decisions were made. Chapter 6 covers the implementa- tion, and covers the specifics of how the various design elements were imple- mented in NomadFS. Chapter 7 contains a performance oriented evaluation of NomadFS in its current state. Chapter 8 rounds off the report with conclusions and potential future work. 12 Chapter 2 Background This chapter covers the background to this project. This includes an overview of file systems and in particular block-based file systems for the unfamiliar reader. Distributed systems, distributed file systems, and some the issues they encounter are then covered. The chapter ends by covering the Linux Virtual Filesystem (VFS) and Filesystem in Userspace (FUSE) with some depth. An understanding of these topics, especially the later ones is important in the context of this project. 2.1 A file system overview A file system is software that provides a means for users to store their data in a persistent manner. From the user's point of view this is generally seen as directories and files. End User / Files and /file1 directories /directory1/ /directory1/file2 File System Block Device Figure 2.1: A file system 13 In file system terminology disks, or raw devices, are divided into equal sized segments called blocks. File systems are then built on top of this block-based storage abstraction, which is typically provided by a block device driver that interfaces with a piece of hardware such as a hard disk drive (HDD). For data to remain persistent, the file system must lay the data out on this series of blocks in an organised manner. Most Unix file systems do this by making use superblocks, inodes, bitmap areas, and data blocks.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bull SAS: Novascale B260 (Intel Xeon Processor 5110,1.60Ghz)
    SPEC CINT2006 Result spec Copyright 2006-2014 Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation Bull SAS SPECint2006 = 10.2 NovaScale B260 (Intel Xeon processor 5110,1.60GHz) SPECint_base2006 = 9.84 CPU2006 license: 20 Test date: Dec-2006 Test sponsor: Bull SAS Hardware Availability: Dec-2006 Tested by: Bull SAS Software Availability: Dec-2006 0 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 12.7 400.perlbench 11.6 8.64 401.bzip2 8.41 6.59 403.gcc 6.38 11.9 429.mcf 12.7 12.0 445.gobmk 10.6 6.90 456.hmmer 6.72 10.8 458.sjeng 9.90 11.0 462.libquantum 10.8 17.1 464.h264ref 16.8 9.22 471.omnetpp 8.38 7.84 473.astar 7.83 12.5 483.xalancbmk 12.4 SPECint_base2006 = 9.84 SPECint2006 = 10.2 Hardware Software CPU Name: Intel Xeon 5110 Operating System: Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (32 bits) CPU Characteristics: 1.60 GHz, 4MB L2, 1066MHz bus Service Pack1 CPU MHz: 1600 Compiler: Intel C++ Compiler for IA32 version 9.1 Package ID W_CC_C_9.1.033 Build no 20061103Z FPU: Integrated Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 (lib & linker) CPU(s) enabled: 1 core, 1 chip, 2 cores/chip MicroQuill SmartHeap Library 8.0 (shlW32M.lib) CPU(s) orderable: 1 to 2 chips Auto Parallel: No Primary Cache: 32 KB I + 32 KB D on chip per core File System: NTFS Secondary Cache: 4 MB I+D on chip per chip System State: Default L3 Cache: None Base Pointers: 32-bit Other Cache: None Peak Pointers: 32-bit Memory: 8 GB (2GB DIMMx4, FB-DIMM PC2-5300F ECC CL5) Other Software: None Disk Subsystem: 73 GB SAS, 10000RPM Other Hardware: None
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Filesystem Performance: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Vs
    COMPARING FILE SYSTEM I/O PERFORMANCE: RED HAT ENTERPRISE LINUX 6 VS. MICROSOFT WINDOWS SERVER 2012 When choosing an operating system platform for your servers, you should know what I/O performance to expect from the operating system and file systems you select. In the Principled Technologies labs, using the IOzone file system benchmark, we compared the I/O performance of two operating systems and file system pairs, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 with ext4 and XFS file systems, and Microsoft Windows Server 2012 with NTFS and ReFS file systems. Our testing compared out-of-the-box configurations for each operating system, as well as tuned configurations optimized for better performance, to demonstrate how a few simple adjustments can elevate I/O performance of a file system. We found that file systems available with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 delivered better I/O performance than those shipped with Windows Server 2012, in both out-of- the-box and optimized configurations. With I/O performance playing such a critical role in most business applications, selecting the right file system and operating system combination is critical to help you achieve your hardware’s maximum potential. APRIL 2013 A PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES TEST REPORT Commissioned by Red Hat, Inc. About file system and platform configurations While you can use IOzone to gauge disk performance, we concentrated on the file system performance of two operating systems (OSs): Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, where we examined the ext4 and XFS file systems, and Microsoft Windows Server 2012 Datacenter Edition, where we examined NTFS and ReFS file systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypervisors Vs. Lightweight Virtualization: a Performance Comparison
    2015 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering Hypervisors vs. Lightweight Virtualization: a Performance Comparison Roberto Morabito, Jimmy Kjällman, and Miika Komu Ericsson Research, NomadicLab Jorvas, Finland [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract — Virtualization of operating systems provides a container and alternative solutions. The idea is to quantify the common way to run different services in the cloud. Recently, the level of overhead introduced by these platforms and the lightweight virtualization technologies claim to offer superior existing gap compared to a non-virtualized environment. performance. In this paper, we present a detailed performance The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: in comparison of traditional hypervisor based virtualization and Section II, literature review and a brief description of all the new lightweight solutions. In our measurements, we use several technologies and platforms evaluated is provided. The benchmarks tools in order to understand the strengths, methodology used to realize our performance comparison is weaknesses, and anomalies introduced by these different platforms in terms of processing, storage, memory and network. introduced in Section III. The benchmark results are presented Our results show that containers achieve generally better in Section IV. Finally, some concluding remarks and future performance when compared with traditional virtual machines work are provided in Section V. and other recent solutions. Albeit containers offer clearly more dense deployment of virtual machines, the performance II. BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK difference with other technologies is in many cases relatively small. In this section, we provide an overview of the different technologies included in the performance comparison.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Better Performance Per Watt in Virtual Environments on Asymmetric Single-ISA Multi-Core Systems
    Towards Better Performance Per Watt in Virtual Environments on Asymmetric Single-ISA Multi-core Systems Viren Kumar Alexandra Fedorova Simon Fraser University Simon Fraser University 8888 University Dr 8888 University Dr Vancouver, Canada Vancouver, Canada [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT performance per watt than homogeneous multicore proces- Single-ISA heterogeneous multicore architectures promise to sors. As power consumption in data centers becomes a grow- deliver plenty of cores with varying complexity, speed and ing concern [3], deploying ASISA multicore systems is an performance in the near future. Virtualization enables mul- increasingly attractive opportunity. These systems perform tiple operating systems to run concurrently as distinct, in- at their best if application workloads are assigned to het- dependent guest domains, thereby reducing core idle time erogeneous cores in consideration of their runtime proper- and maximizing throughput. This paper seeks to identify a ties [4][13][12][18][24][21]. Therefore, understanding how to heuristic that can aid in intelligently scheduling these vir- schedule data-center workloads on ASISA systems is an im- tualized workloads to maximize performance while reducing portant problem. This paper takes the first step towards power consumption. understanding the properties of data center workloads that determine how they should be scheduled on ASISA multi- We propose that the controlling domain in a Virtual Ma- core processors. Since virtual machine technology is a de chine Monitor or hypervisor is relatively insensitive to changes facto standard for data centers, we study virtual machine in core frequency, and thus scheduling it on a slower core (VM) workloads. saves power while only slightly affecting guest domain per- formance.
    [Show full text]
  • I.MX 8Quadxplus Power and Performance
    NXP Semiconductors Document Number: AN12338 Application Note Rev. 4 , 04/2020 i.MX 8QuadXPlus Power and Performance 1. Introduction Contents This application note helps you to design power 1. Introduction ........................................................................ 1 management systems. It illustrates the current drain 2. Overview of i.MX 8QuadXPlus voltage supplies .............. 1 3. Power measurement of the i.MX 8QuadXPlus processor ... 2 measurements of the i.MX 8QuadXPlus Applications 3.1. VCC_SCU_1V8 power ........................................... 4 Processors taken on NXP Multisensory Evaluation Kit 3.2. VCC_DDRIO power ............................................... 4 (MEK) Platform through several use cases. 3.3. VCC_CPU/VCC_GPU/VCC_MAIN power ........... 5 3.4. Temperature measurements .................................... 5 This document provides details on the performance and 3.5. Hardware and software used ................................... 6 3.6. Measuring points on the MEK platform .................. 6 power consumption of the i.MX 8QuadXPlus 4. Use cases and measurement results .................................... 6 processors under a variety of low- and high-power 4.1. Low-power mode power consumption (Key States modes. or ‘KS’)…… ......................................................................... 7 4.2. Complex use case power consumption (Arm Core, The data presented in this application note is based on GPU active) ......................................................................... 11 5. SOC
    [Show full text]
  • Software Performance Engineering Using Virtual Time Program Execution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Spiral - Imperial College Digital Repository IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTING Software Performance Engineering using Virtual Time Program Execution Nikolaos Baltas Submitted in part fullment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computing of Imperial College London and the Diploma of Imperial College London To my mother Dimitra for her endless support The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives licence. Re- searchers are free to copy, distribute or transmit the thesis on the condition that they attribute it, that they do not use it for commercial purposes and that they do not alter, transform or build upon it. For any reuse or redistribution, researchers must make clear to others the licence terms of this work. 4 Abstract In this thesis we introduce a novel approach to software performance engineering that is based on the execution of code in virtual time. Virtual time execution models the timing-behaviour of unmodified applications by scaling observed method times or replacing them with results acquired from performance model simulation. This facilitates the investigation of \what-if" performance predictions of applications comprising an arbitrary combination of real code and performance models. The ability to analyse code and models in a single framework enables performance testing throughout the software lifecycle, without the need to to extract perfor- mance models from code. This is accomplished by forcing thread scheduling decisions to take into account the hypothetical time-scaling or model-based performance specifications of each method.
    [Show full text]
  • Connectcore® 8X Performance and Power Benchmarking Report
    ConnectCore® 8X Performance and Power Benchmarking Report Application Note Revision history—90002448 Revision Date Description A March 2021 Initial release. Trademarks and copyright Digi, Digi International, and the Digi logo are trademarks or registered trademarks in the United States and other countries worldwide. All other trademarks mentioned in this document are the property of their respective owners. © 2021 Digi International Inc. All rights reserved. Disclaimers Information in this document is subject to change without notice and does not represent a commitment on the part of Digi International. Digi provides this document “as is,” without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of fitness or merchantability for a particular purpose. Digi may make improvements and/or changes in this manual or in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described in this manual at any time. Feedback To provide feedback on this document, email your comments to [email protected] Include the document title and part number (ConnectCore® 8X Performance and Power, 90002448 A) in the subject line of your email. ConnectCore® 8X Performance and Power 2 Contents Introduction Power architecture Measurement conditions Hardware used 7 Software used 7 Digi Embedded Yocto 7 MCA firmware 7 Benchmark packages 8 Host requirements 8 General conditions 8 Location and environment 8 Instrumentation 9 SOM power measurements 9 How to calculate SOM power 9 Resistor swap 9 Console cable 9 Measure points 10 Formula 10
    [Show full text]
  • PIC Licensing Information User Manual
    Oracle® Communications Performance Intelligence Center Licensing Information User Manual Release 10.1 E56971 Revision 3 April 2015 Oracle Communications Performance Intelligence Center Licensing Information User Manual, Release 10.1 Copyright © 2003, 2015 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 is software or related documentation that is delivered to the U.S. Government or anyone licensing it on behalf of the U.S. Government, the following notices are applicable: U.S. GOVERNMENT END USERS: Oracle programs, including any operating system, integrated software, any programs installed on the hardware, and/or documentation, delivered to U.S. Government end users are "commercial computer software" pursuant to the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation and agency-specific supplemental regulations. As such, use, duplication, disclosure, modification, and adaptation of the programs, including any operating system, integrated software, any programs installed on the hardware, and/or documentation, shall be subject to license terms and license restrictions applicable to the programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Benchmarking for Cloud Computing Systems
    Fair Benchmarking for Cloud Computing Systems Authors: Lee Gillam Bin Li John O’Loughlin Anuz Pranap Singh Tomar March 2012 Contents 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 2 Background .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 3 Previous work ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Literature ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Related Resources ............................................................................................................................................. 6 4 Preparation ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 4.1 Cloud Providers................................................................................................................................................. 9 4.2 Cloud APIs ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 4.3 Benchmark selection ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mqsim: a Framework for Enabling Realistic Studies of Modern Multi-Queue SSD Devices
    MQSim: A Framework for Enabling Realistic Studies of Modern Multi-Queue SSD Devices Arash Tavakkol, Juan Gómez-Luna, and Mohammad Sadrosadati, ETH Zürich; Saugata Ghose, Carnegie Mellon University; Onur Mutlu, ETH Zürich and Carnegie Mellon University https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast18/presentation/tavakkol This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 16th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies. February 12–15, 2018 • Oakland, CA, USA ISBN 978-1-931971-42-3 Open access to the Proceedings of the 16th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies is sponsored by USENIX. MQSim: A Framework for Enabling Realistic Studies of Modern Multi-Queue SSD Devices Arash Tavakkol†, Juan Gomez-Luna´ †, Mohammad Sadrosadati†, Saugata Ghose‡, Onur Mutlu†‡ †ETH Zurich¨ ‡Carnegie Mellon University Abstract sponse time, and decreasing cost, SSDs have replaced traditional magnetic hard disk drives (HDDs) in many Solid-state drives (SSDs) are used in a wide array of datacenters and enterprise servers, as well as in consumer computer systems today, including in datacenters and en- devices. As the I/O demand of both enterprise and con- terprise servers. As the I/O demands of these systems sumer applications continues to grow, SSD architectures continue to increase, manufacturers are evolving SSD ar- are rapidly evolving to deliver improved performance. chitectures to keep up with this demand. For example, manufacturers have introduced new high-bandwidth in- For example, a major innovation has been the intro- terfaces to replace the conventional SATA host–interface duction of new host interfaces to the SSD. In the past, protocol. These new interfaces, such as the NVMe proto- many SSDs made use of the Serial Advanced Technology col, are designed specifically to enable the high amounts Attachment (SATA) protocol [67], which was originally of concurrent I/O bandwidth that SSDs are capable of designed for HDDs.
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystem Benchmark Tool
    Masaryk University Faculty of Informatics Filesystem Benchmark Tool Bachelor’s Thesis Tomáš Zvoník Brno, Spring 2019 Masaryk University Faculty of Informatics Filesystem Benchmark Tool Bachelor’s Thesis Tomáš Zvoník Brno, Spring 2019 This is where a copy of the official signed thesis assignment and a copy ofthe Statement of an Author is located in the printed version of the document. Declaration Hereby I declare that this paper is my original authorial work, which I have worked out on my own. All sources, references, and literature used or excerpted during elaboration of this work are properly cited and listed in complete reference to the due source. Tomáš Zvoník Advisor: RNDr. Lukáš Hejtmánek, Ph.D. i Acknowledgements I would like to thank my thesis leader Lukáš Hejtmánek for guiding me through the process of creating this work. I would also like to thank my family and friends for being by my side, providing support, laughs and overall a nice environment to be in. Lastly I would like to thank my parents for supporting me throughout my whole life and giving me the opportunity to study at a university. ii Abstract In this thesis I have created a filesystem benchmark tool that com- bines best features of already existing tools. It can measure read/write speeds as well as speed of metadata operations. It can run on multi- ple threads and on multiple network connected nodes. I have then used my benchmark tool to compare performance of different storage devices and file systems. iii Keywords benchmark, file, system, iozone, fio, bonnie++ iv Contents Introduction 1 1 Existing benchmarks 3 1.1 IOzone ............................
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Architectures an Overview
    Computer Architectures An Overview PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 22:35:32 UTC Contents Articles Microarchitecture 1 x86 7 PowerPC 23 IBM POWER 33 MIPS architecture 39 SPARC 57 ARM architecture 65 DEC Alpha 80 AlphaStation 92 AlphaServer 95 Very long instruction word 103 Instruction-level parallelism 107 Explicitly parallel instruction computing 108 References Article Sources and Contributors 111 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 113 Article Licenses License 114 Microarchitecture 1 Microarchitecture In computer engineering, microarchitecture (sometimes abbreviated to µarch or uarch), also called computer organization, is the way a given instruction set architecture (ISA) is implemented on a processor. A given ISA may be implemented with different microarchitectures.[1] Implementations might vary due to different goals of a given design or due to shifts in technology.[2] Computer architecture is the combination of microarchitecture and instruction set design. Relation to instruction set architecture The ISA is roughly the same as the programming model of a processor as seen by an assembly language programmer or compiler writer. The ISA includes the execution model, processor registers, address and data formats among other things. The Intel Core microarchitecture microarchitecture includes the constituent parts of the processor and how these interconnect and interoperate to implement the ISA. The microarchitecture of a machine is usually represented as (more or less detailed) diagrams that describe the interconnections of the various microarchitectural elements of the machine, which may be everything from single gates and registers, to complete arithmetic logic units (ALU)s and even larger elements.
    [Show full text]