The uFLIP benchmark revisited for evaluating SSDs

Summary Solid-state drives (SSDs) provide higher bandwidth and lower access latency than hard disk drives (HDDs) and thus have been rapidly replacing HDDs. SSD manufacturers, which produce different types of SSDs, do not open their SSD architecture and control firmware in detail. To find the best SSD for a given application, it is necessary to compare and analyze the performances of different kinds of SSDs. A benchmark is widely used to analyze the storage devices performance. However, most existing benchmarks are mainly targeted for HDDs. The uFLIP (understanding Flash IO Patterns) is a benchmark proposed to consider flash devices' characteristics. In this paper, we first exploit the uFLIP benchmark to analyze and to evaluate the performances of different types of SSDs. Through extensive experiments, we have identified common SSD characteristics: (1) the input/output (IO) size and queue depth affect the parallelism that is an inherent characteristic in SSDs; (2) the size of SSDs access space considerably affects the SSDs performance. Then, via a series of experiments, we verify whether the uFLIP benchmark could correctly characterize applications by its micro-benchmarks. The results reveal that the performance of the uFLIP micro-benchmarks, produced to have features similar to that of a target application, is quite different from the performance of the target application. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Stratis Viglas,et al.  Data management over flash memory , 2011, SIGMOD '11.

[2]  Ippokratis Pandis,et al.  TPC-E vs. TPC-C: characterizing the new TPC-E benchmark via an I/O comparison study , 2011, SGMD.

[3]  Sang-Won Lee,et al.  Advances in flash memory SSD technology for enterprise database applications , 2009, SIGMOD Conference.

[4]  Alexander S. Szalay,et al.  Performance modeling and analysis of flash-based storage devices , 2011, 2011 IEEE 27th Symposium on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies (MSST).

[5]  Hong Jiang,et al.  Exploring and Exploiting the Multilevel Parallelism Inside SSDs for Improved Performance and Endurance , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[6]  Hong Jiang,et al.  Performance impact and interplay of SSD parallelism through advanced commands, allocation strategy and data granularity , 2011, ICS '11.

[7]  Jae-Myung Kim,et al.  A case for flash memory ssd in enterprise database applications , 2008, SIGMOD Conference.

[8]  JacobBruce,et al.  The performance of PC solid-state disks (SSDs) as a function of bandwidth, concurrency, device architecture, and system organization , 2009 .

[9]  Sanam Shahla Rizvi,et al.  Flash SSD vs HDD: High performance oriented modern embedded and multimedia storage systems , 2010, 2010 2nd International Conference on Computer Engineering and Technology.

[10]  Leonard Barolli,et al.  Mapping granularity and performance tradeoffs for solid state drive , 2012, The Journal of Supercomputing.

[11]  Sang-Won Lee,et al.  Fast, Energy Efficient Scan inside Flash Memory , 2011, ADMS@VLDB.

[12]  Bharath Radhakrishnan,et al.  Survey on Application Level Tools for SSD Benchmark Validation , 2013, 2013 UKSim 15th International Conference on Computer Modelling and Simulation.

[13]  Xiaodong Zhang,et al.  Essential roles of exploiting internal parallelism of flash memory based solid state drives in high-speed data processing , 2011, 2011 IEEE 17th International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture.

[14]  Rina Panigrahy,et al.  Design Tradeoffs for SSD Performance , 2008, USENIX ATC.

[15]  Chanik Park,et al.  Intelligent SSD: A turbo for big data mining , 2016, Comput. Sci. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Fei Wu,et al.  Measuring and Analyzing Write Amplification Characteristics of Solid State Disks , 2013, 2013 IEEE 21st International Symposium on Modelling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems.

[17]  Seung Ryoul Maeng,et al.  FTL design exploration in reconfigurable high-performance SSD for server applications , 2009, ICS.

[18]  Bruce Jacob,et al.  The performance of PC solid-state disks (SSDs) as a function of bandwidth, concurrency, device architecture, and system organization , 2009, ISCA '09.

[19]  Youngjae Kim,et al.  DFTL: a flash translation layer employing demand-based selective caching of page-level address mappings , 2009, ASPLOS.

[20]  Okkyung Choi,et al.  LZCode based compression method for effectively using the memory of embedded devices , 2013, Int. J. Commun. Syst..

[21]  Ippokratis Pandis,et al.  From A to E: analyzing TPC's OLTP benchmarks: the obsolete, the ubiquitous, the unexplored , 2013, EDBT '13.