Formal Definitions and Performance Comparison of Consistency Models for Parallel File Systems

Chen Wang, Kathryn Mohror, Marc Snir
{"title":"Formal Definitions and Performance Comparison of Consistency Models for Parallel File Systems","authors":"Chen Wang, Kathryn Mohror, Marc Snir","doi":"arxiv-2402.14105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The semantics of HPC storage systems are defined by the consistency models to\nwhich they abide. Storage consistency models have been less studied than their\ncounterparts in memory systems, with the exception of the POSIX standard and\nits strict consistency model. The use of POSIX consistency imposes a\nperformance penalty that becomes more significant as the scale of parallel file\nsystems increases and the access time to storage devices, such as node-local\nsolid storage devices, decreases. While some efforts have been made to adopt\nrelaxed storage consistency models, these models are often defined informally\nand ambiguously as by-products of a particular implementation. In this work, we\nestablish a connection between memory consistency models and storage\nconsistency models and revisit the key design choices of storage consistency\nmodels from a high-level perspective. Further, we propose a formal and unified\nframework for defining storage consistency models and a layered implementation\nthat can be used to easily evaluate their relative performance for different\nI/O workloads. Finally, we conduct a comprehensive performance comparison of\ntwo relaxed consistency models on a range of commonly-seen parallel I/O\nworkloads, such as checkpoint/restart of scientific applications and random\nreads of deep learning applications. We demonstrate that for certain I/O\nscenarios, a weaker consistency model can significantly improve the I/O\nperformance. For instance, in small random reads that typically found in deep\nlearning applications, session consistency achieved an 5x improvement in I/O\nbandwidth compared to commit consistency, even at small scales.","PeriodicalId":501333,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Operating Systems","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Operating Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2402.14105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The semantics of HPC storage systems are defined by the consistency models to which they abide. Storage consistency models have been less studied than their counterparts in memory systems, with the exception of the POSIX standard and its strict consistency model. The use of POSIX consistency imposes a performance penalty that becomes more significant as the scale of parallel file systems increases and the access time to storage devices, such as node-local solid storage devices, decreases. While some efforts have been made to adopt relaxed storage consistency models, these models are often defined informally and ambiguously as by-products of a particular implementation. In this work, we establish a connection between memory consistency models and storage consistency models and revisit the key design choices of storage consistency models from a high-level perspective. Further, we propose a formal and unified framework for defining storage consistency models and a layered implementation that can be used to easily evaluate their relative performance for different I/O workloads. Finally, we conduct a comprehensive performance comparison of two relaxed consistency models on a range of commonly-seen parallel I/O workloads, such as checkpoint/restart of scientific applications and random reads of deep learning applications. We demonstrate that for certain I/O scenarios, a weaker consistency model can significantly improve the I/O performance. For instance, in small random reads that typically found in deep learning applications, session consistency achieved an 5x improvement in I/O bandwidth compared to commit consistency, even at small scales.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
并行文件系统一致性模型的正式定义和性能比较
高性能计算存储系统的语义是由其遵守的一致性模型定义的。除了 POSIX 标准及其严格的一致性模型之外,对存储一致性模型的研究要少于内存系统中的同类模型。随着并行文件系统规模的扩大和存储设备(如节点-本地固态存储设备)访问时间的缩短,使用 POSIX 一致性会带来更严重的性能损失。虽然人们已经做出了一些努力来采用宽松的存储一致性模型,但这些模型往往是作为特定实现的副产品而被非正式地、模棱两可地定义的。在这项工作中,我们建立了内存一致性模型和存储一致性模型之间的联系,并从高层次的角度重新审视了存储一致性模型的关键设计选择。此外,我们还提出了一个用于定义存储一致性模型和分层实现的正式统一框架,可用于轻松评估它们在不同 I/O 工作负载下的相对性能。最后,我们在一系列常见的并行 I/O 工作负载(如科学应用的检查点/重启和深度学习应用的随机读取)上对两种宽松的一致性模型进行了全面的性能比较。我们证明,对于某些 I/O 场景,较弱的一致性模型可以显著提高 I/O 性能。例如,在深度学习应用中常见的小规模随机读取中,会话一致性比提交一致性的 I/O 带宽提高了 5 倍,即使在小规模情况下也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of Synchronization Mechanisms in Operating Systems Skip TLB flushes for reused pages within mmap's eBPF-mm: Userspace-guided memory management in Linux with eBPF BULKHEAD: Secure, Scalable, and Efficient Kernel Compartmentalization with PKS Rethinking Programmed I/O for Fast Devices, Cheap Cores, and Coherent Interconnects
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1