Peer-to-Peer Single Hop Distributed Hash Tables

Efficiently locating information in large-scale distributed systems is a challenging problem to which Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) can provide a highly scalable and cost-effective solution. However, there is very little experience on using DHTs in performance sensitive environments such as High Performance Computing (HPC) datacenters, and there is no published experimental comparison among low-latency DHTs. To fill this gap, we conducted an in-depth performance comparison of three proposed low-latency single-hop DHTs namely 1h-Calot, D1HT, and OneHop. Specifically, we compared experimentally the lookup latency and CPU use of D1HT with those of 1h-Calot by running each of them concurrently with the normal workload production for a subset of 1,800 nodes of a heavy-loaded HPC datacenter. In addition, we carried out an analytical performance comparison among the three single-hop DHTs for system sizes of up to 10 million nodes. The results showed that D1HT consistently had the smallest overhead and in most cases it required one order of magnitude less bandwidth than 1h-Calot and OneHop. Overall, the combination of our experimental and analytical results suggests that D1HT can provide a very effective solution for a broad range of environments, from large-scale HPC datacenters to widely deployed Internet P2P applications such as BitTorrent with up to one million peers. This ability to support such a wide range of environments may allow D1HT to be used as an inexpensive and scalable commodity software substrate for large-scale distributed applications.

[1]  S. Krause,et al.  OverSim: A Flexible Overlay Network Simulation Framework , 2007, 2007 IEEE Global Internet Symposium.

[2]  Mark Handley,et al.  A scalable content-addressable network , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

[3]  Jairo Panetta,et al.  Computational Characteristics of Production Seismic Migration and its Performance on Novel Processor Architectures , 2007, 19th International Symposium on Computer Architecture and High Performance Computing (SBAC-PAD'07).

[4]  Antony I. T. Rowstron,et al.  Pastry: Scalable, Decentralized Object Location, and Routing for Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems , 2001, Middleware.

[5]  Nazareno Andrade,et al.  Influences on cooperation in BitTorrent communities , 2005, P2PECON '05.

[6]  Cláudio L. Amorim,et al.  D1HT: a distributed one hop hash table , 2006, Proceedings 20th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium.

[7]  Eric A. Brewer,et al.  Lessons from Giant-Scale Services , 2001, IEEE Internet Comput..

[8]  Robert Tappan Morris,et al.  A performance vs. cost framework for evaluating DHT design tradeoffs under churn , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[9]  David R. Karger,et al.  Consistent hashing and random trees: distributed caching protocols for relieving hot spots on the World Wide Web , 1997, STOC '97.

[10]  R. Rodrigues,et al.  Full-Information Lookups for Peer-to-Peer Overlays , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems.

[11]  Robert Tappan Morris,et al.  Bandwidth-efficient management of DHT routing tables , 2005, NSDI.

[12]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  A measurement study of Napster and Gnutella as examples of peer-to-peer file sharing systems , 2002, CCRV.

[13]  David R. Karger,et al.  Chord: a scalable peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications , 2003, TNET.

[14]  Stefan Savage,et al.  Structured superpeers: leveraging heterogeneity to provide constant-time lookup , 2003, Proceedings the Third IEEE Workshop on Internet Applications. WIAPP 2003.

[15]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  Pond: The OceanStore Prototype , 2003, FAST.

[16]  Luiz André Barroso,et al.  Web Search for a Planet: The Google Cluster Architecture , 2003, IEEE Micro.

[17]  John Kubiatowicz,et al.  Handling churn in a DHT , 2004 .

[18]  Sandhya Dwarkadas,et al.  Low traffic overlay networks with large routing tables , 2005, SIGMETRICS '05.

[19]  Robert Tappan Morris,et al.  Comparing the Performance of Distributed Hash Tables Under Churn , 2004, IPTPS.

[20]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  Awarded Best Student Paper! - Pond: The OceanStore Prototype , 2003 .

[21]  David R. Karger,et al.  Wide-area cooperative storage with CFS , 2001, SOSP.

[22]  Johan A. Pouwelse,et al.  The Bittorrent P2P File-Sharing System: Measurements and Analysis , 2005, IPTPS.

[23]  David Mazières,et al.  Kademlia: A Peer-to-Peer Information System Based on the XOR Metric , 2002, IPTPS.

[24]  Antony I. T. Rowstron,et al.  Storage management and caching in PAST, a large-scale, persistent peer-to-peer storage utility , 2001, SOSP.

[25]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Querying the Internet with PIER , 2003, VLDB.

[26]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Measurement study of peer-to-peer file system sharing , 2002 .

[27]  Honghui Lu,et al.  Peer-to-peer support for massively multiplayer games , 2004, IEEE INFOCOM 2004.

[28]  Tim Moors,et al.  Stable High-Capacity One-Hop Distributed Hash Tables , 2006, 11th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC'06).

[29]  David R. Karger,et al.  Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

[30]  David A. Patterson,et al.  Latency lags bandwith , 2004, CACM.