Incremental Throughput Allocation of Heterogeneous Storage With No Disruptions in Dynamic Setting

Solid-state drives (SSDs) have been added into storage systems for improving their performance, which will bring the heterogeneity into the storage medium. The throughput is one of the essential resources in heterogeneous storage systems, and how to allocate the throughput plays a crucial role in user performance. There are many types of research on the throughput allocation of heterogeneous storage systems. However, the throughput allocation of heterogeneous storage is facing new challenges in a dynamic setting, where users are not present in the system simultaneously, and enter the system dynamically. Drawing on economic game-theory, researchers have proposed many methods to tackle dynamic throughput allocation issues for heterogeneous storages, cross out enjoying Sharing Incentive (SI), Envy Freeness (EF), and Pareto Optimality (PO). However, they either relax constraints of fairness property to cause the allocation with weak fairness or interrupt some users present in the system to give up a piece of their allocations for new users entering the system, which will degrade these donors’ performance. Moreover, all of existing methods will cause lower resource utilization due to constraints of users’ dominant share equality. In this article, we propose a dynamic throughout allocation method based on gradual increase (DAGI), which can adapt to various workloads to make a fair allocation with a maximum resource utilization. Without relaxing constraints of fairness properties, when new users enter the system, DAGI can make a dynamic allocation with strong fairness by appropriately postponing the allocation of surplus throughputs, so this can provide an opportunity that DAGI can guarantee the final allocation with strong fairness when allocating remaining throughputs after all users are present in the system. Meanwhile, DAGI can gradually increase user allocation without reduction, which will not interrupt any users present in the system. Furthermore, DAGI can conduct a dynamic throughput allocation based on users’ local bottleneck resources, which can adapt to various workloads of users to improve resource utilization. Extensive experiments are conducted to prove the effectiveness of DAGI. The experimental results show that DAGI can achieve higher resource utilization and performance than existing methods, and can satisfy desirable game-theoretic properties with guaranteeing the strong fairness. In addition, DAGI gradually increases the allocation of each user without interrupting any user to reduce its allocation to degrade its performance.

[1]  Amit Kumar,et al.  Maintaining Assignments Online: Matching, Scheduling, and Flows , 2014, SODA.

[2]  Eric J. Friedman,et al.  Dynamic Fair Division with Minimal Disruptions , 2015, EC.

[3]  William E. Weihl,et al.  Lottery scheduling: flexible proportional-share resource management , 1994, OSDI '94.

[4]  Burkhard Stiller,et al.  A Survey of the State-of-the-Art in Fair Multi-Resource Allocations for Data Centers , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management.

[5]  Kai Shen,et al.  FIOS: a fair, efficient flash I/O scheduler , 2012, FAST.

[6]  Irfan Ahmad,et al.  PARDA: Proportional Allocation of Resources for Distributed Storage Access , 2009, FAST.

[7]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  Demand Based Hierarchical QoS Using Storage Resource Pools , 2012, USENIX Annual Technical Conference.

[8]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Online Cake Cutting , 2010, ADT.

[9]  Irfan Ahmad,et al.  BASIL: Automated IO Load Balancing Across Storage Devices , 2010, FAST.

[10]  Ariel D. Procaccia Thou Shalt Covet Thy Neighbor's Cake , 2009, IJCAI.

[11]  Hui Wang,et al.  Fairness-efficiency tradeoffs in tiered storage allocation , 2014, SPAA.

[12]  Nathan Linial,et al.  No justified complaints: on fair sharing of multiple resources , 2011, ITCS '12.

[13]  Wei Jin,et al.  Interposed proportional sharing for a storage service utility , 2004, SIGMETRICS '04/Performance '04.

[14]  Limin Xiao,et al.  Hybrid Storage Throughput Allocation Among Multiple Clients in Heterogeneous Data Center , 2015, 2015 IEEE 17th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications, 2015 IEEE 7th International Symposium on Cyberspace Safety and Security, and 2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on Embedded Software and Systems.

[15]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Online Fair Division: Analysing a Food Bank Problem , 2015, IJCAI.

[16]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  Truth, justice, and cake cutting , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[17]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  Efficient QoS for Multi-Tiered Storage Systems , 2012, HotStorage.

[18]  Arif Merchant,et al.  Proportional-Share Scheduling for Distributed Storage Systems , 2007, FAST.

[19]  Leah Epstein,et al.  Robust Algorithms for Preemptive Scheduling , 2011, Algorithmica.

[20]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  No agent left behind: dynamic fair division of multiple resources , 2013, AAMAS.

[21]  Wei Wang,et al.  Multi-Resource Fair Allocation in Heterogeneous Cloud Computing Systems , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems.

[22]  Benjamin Farley,et al.  More for your money: exploiting performance heterogeneity in public clouds , 2012, SoCC '12.

[23]  Xiaoyun Zhu,et al.  Triage: Performance differentiation for storage systems using adaptive control , 2005, TOS.

[24]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Competitive Repeated Allocation without Payments , 2009, WINE.

[25]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  Brief announcement: application-sensitive QoS scheduling in storage servers , 2012, SPAA '12.

[26]  Vyas Sekar,et al.  Multi-resource fair queueing for packet processing , 2012, CCRV.

[27]  Eric J. Friedman,et al.  Controlled Dynamic Fair Division , 2017, EC.

[28]  Christos-Alexandros Psomas,et al.  Beyond Beyond Dominant Resource Fairness : Indivisible Resource Allocation In Clusters , 2012 .

[29]  Gregory R. Ganger,et al.  Towards higher disk head utilization: extracting free bandwidth from busy disk drives , 2000, OSDI.

[30]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  Reward Scheduling for QoS in Cloud Applications , 2012, 2012 12th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (ccgrid 2012).

[31]  Richard A. Golding,et al.  Zygaria: Storage Performance as a Managed Resource , 2006, 12th IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS'06).

[32]  Steven J. Phillips,et al.  Online load balancing and network flow , 1993, STOC.

[33]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  Beyond Dominant Resource Fairness , 2015, ACM Trans. Economics and Comput..

[34]  Kai Shen,et al.  FlashFQ: A Fair Queueing I/O Scheduler for Flash-Based SSDs , 2013, USENIX Annual Technical Conference.

[35]  Erel Segal-Halevi,et al.  Redividing the cake , 2016, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[36]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  Balancing fairness and efficiency in tiered storage systems with bottleneck-aware allocation , 2014, FAST.

[37]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  pClock: an arrival curve based approach for QoS guarantees in shared storage systems , 2007, SIGMETRICS '07.

[38]  Yoshifumi Manabe,et al.  A Non-blocking Online Cake-Cutting Protocol , 2016, 2016 Third International Conference on Mathematics and Computers in Sciences and in Industry (MCSI).

[39]  Martin Skutella,et al.  Online Scheduling with Bounded Migration , 2004, ICALP.

[40]  Arif Merchant,et al.  Façade: Virtual Storage Devices with Performance Guarantees , 2003, FAST.

[41]  Peter J. Varman,et al.  mClock: Handling Throughput Variability for Hypervisor IO Scheduling , 2010, OSDI.

[42]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Dynamic Scheduling with Service Curve for QoS Guarantee of Large-Scale Cloud Storage , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[43]  Antti Ylä-Jääski,et al.  Is the Same Instance Type Created Equal? Exploiting Heterogeneity of Public Clouds , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing.

[44]  Harrick M. Vin,et al.  Start-time fair queueing: a scheduling algorithm for integrated services packet switching networks , 1996, SIGCOMM '96.

[45]  A. L. Narasimha Reddy,et al.  Exploiting Concurrency to Improve Latency and throughput in a Hybrid Storage System , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems.

[46]  Benjamin Hindman,et al.  Dominant Resource Fairness: Fair Allocation of Multiple Resource Types , 2011, NSDI.

[47]  Ion Stoica,et al.  Duality between resource reservation and proportional share resource allocation , 1996, Electronic Imaging.

[48]  Steven J. Brams,et al.  Fair division - from cake-cutting to dispute resolution , 1998 .

[49]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm , 1989, SIGCOMM '89.