Check out the new USENIX Web site. next up previous
Next: Conclusions Up: Improving Storage System Availability Previous: Commercial Feasibility


Related Work

D-GRAID draws on related work from a number of different areas, including distributed file systems and traditional RAID systems. We discuss each in turn.

Distributed File Systems: Designers of distributed file systems have long ago realized the problems that arise when spreading a directory tree across different machines in a system. For example, Walker et al. discuss the importance of directory namespace replication within the Locus distributed system [35]. The Coda mobile file system also takes explicit care with regard to the directory tree [27]. Specifically, if a file is cached, Coda makes sure to cache every directory up to the root of the directory tree. By doing so, Coda can guarantee that a file remains accessible should a disconnection occur. Perhaps an interesting extension to our work would be to reconsider host-based in-memory caching with availability in mind. Also, Slice [3] tries to route namespace operations for all files in a directory to the same server.

More recently, work in wide-area file systems has also re-emphasized the importance of the directory tree. For example, the Pangaea file system aggressively replicates the entire tree up to the root on a node when a file is accessed [42]. The Island-based file system also points out the need for ``fault isolation'' but in the context of wide-area storage systems; their ``one island principle'' is quite similar to fault-isolated placement in D-GRAID [24].

Finally, p2p systems such as PAST that place an entire file on a single machine have similar load balancing issues [40]. However, the problem is more difficult in the p2p space due to the constraints of file placement; block migration is much simpler in a centralized storage array.

Traditional RAID Systems: We also draw on the long history of research in classic RAID systems. From AutoRAID [47] we learned both that complex functionality could be embedded within a modern storage array, and that background activity could be utilized successfully in such an environment. From AFRAID [43], we learned that there could be a flexible trade-off between performance and reliability, and the value of delaying updates.

Much of RAID research has focused on different redundancy schemes. While early work stressed the ability to tolerate single-disk failures [4,32,33], later research introduced the notion of tolerating multiple-disk failures within an array [2,6]. We stress that our work is complementary to this line of research; traditional techniques can be used to ensure full file system availability up to a certain number of failures, and D-GRAID techniques ensure graceful degradation under additional failures. A related approach is parity striping [18] which stripes only the parity and not data; while this would achieve some fault isolation, the layout is still oblivious of the semantics of the data; blocks will have the same level of redundancy irrespective of their importance (i.e., meta-data vs data), so multiple failures could still make the entire file system inaccessible. A number of earlier works also emphasize the importance of hot sparing to speed recovery time in RAID arrays [21,29,32]. Our work on semantic recovery is also complementary to those approaches.

Finally, note that term ``graceful degradation'' is sometimes used to refer to the performance characteristics of redundant disk systems under failure [22,36]. This type of graceful degradation is different from what we discuss in this paper; indeed, none of those systems continues operation when an unexpected number of failures occurs.



next up previous
Next: Conclusions Up: Improving Storage System Availability Previous: Commercial Feasibility
Muthian Sivathanu 2004-02-17