DistOS 2014W Lecture 14: Difference between revisions
Cleaned up some stuff a bit. |
ADded more info for rest of class |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==Why did the dream die?== | ==Why did the dream die?== | ||
* Biggest reason it died was it's assumption of mistrusting the actors. | |||
** Everything else they did was right. | |||
* Other successful distributed systems are built on a more trusted model. | |||
=== Technology === | === Technology === | ||
Line 67: | Line 71: | ||
==What's worth salvaging from the dream?== | ==What's worth salvaging from the dream?== | ||
* Using spare resources in other locations. | * Using spare resources in other locations. | ||
==How to read a research paper== | |||
* Start with Intro | |||
** Figure out what the problem is | |||
* then see the related work for context | |||
* then go to conclusion. Focus on results. | |||
* then fill in the gaps by reading specific parts of the body |
Revision as of 16:24, 4 March 2014
OceanStore
What is the dream?
- High availabitility, universally accessible.
- Utility managed by multiple parties.
- Highly redundant, fault tolerant
- Basic assumption was that servers would NOT be trusted.
- Highly persistent
- Everything archived
- Everything saved, nothing deleted. "Commits"
- Service was untrusted
- Held opaque/encrypted data.
- Would have been used for more than files. (eg. DB's, etc.)
Why did the dream die?
- Biggest reason it died was it's assumption of mistrusting the actors.
- Everything else they did was right.
- Other successful distributed systems are built on a more trusted model.
Technology
- The trust model is the most attractive feature which ultimately killed it.
- The untrusted assumption was a huge burden on the system. Forced technical limitations made them uncompetitive.
- It is just easier to trust a given system. More convenient.
- Every system is compromisable despite this mistrust
- Pub key system reduces usability
- If you loose your key, you're S.O.L.
- security
- there is no security mechanism in servers side.
- can not now who access the data
- economic side
- The economic model is unconvincing as defined. The authors suggest that a collection of companies will host OceanStore servers, and consumers will buy capacity (not unlike web-hosting of today).
Use Cases
- Subset of the features already exist
- Blackberry and Google offer similar services.
- These current services owned by one company, not many providers.
- Can not sell back your services as a user.
- ex. Can not sell your extra storage back to the utility.
Pond: What insights?
- They actually built it.
- Can't assume the use of any infrastructure, so they rebuild everything!
- Built over the internet.
- Tapestry (routing).
- GUID for object indentification. Object naming scheme.
Benchmarks
- Really good read speed, really bad write speed.
Storage overhead
- How much are they increasing the storage needed to implement their storage model.
- Factor of 4.8x the space needed (you'll have 1/5th the storage)
- Expensive, but good value (data is backed up, replicated, etc..)
Update performance
- No data is mutated. It is diffed and archived.
- Creating a new version of an object and distributing that object.
Benchmarks in a nutshell
- Everything is expensive!
- High latency
Other stuff
- Byzantine fault tolerance
- Assuming certain actors are malicious
What's worth salvaging from the dream?
- Using spare resources in other locations.
How to read a research paper
- Start with Intro
- Figure out what the problem is
- then see the related work for context
- then go to conclusion. Focus on results.
- then fill in the gaps by reading specific parts of the body