CRAID: Online RAID upgrades using dynamic hot data reorganization

Current algorithms used to upgrade RAID arrays typically require large amounts of data to be migrated, even those that move only the minimum amount of data required to keep a balanced data load. This paper presents CRAID, a self-optimizing RAID array that performs an online block reorganization of frequently used, long-term accessed data in order to reduce this migration even further. To achieve this objective, CRAID tracks frequently used, long-term data blocks and copies them to a dedicated partition spread across all the disks in the array. When new disks are added, CRAID only needs to extend this process to the new devices to redistribute this partition, thus greatly reducing the overhead of the upgrade process. In addition, the reorganized access patterns within this partition improve the array’s performance, amortizing the copy overhead and allowing CRAID to offer a performance competitive with traditional RAIDs. We describe CRAID’s motivation and design and we evaluate it by replaying seven real-world workloads including a file server, a web server and a user share. Our experiments show that CRAID can successfully detect hot data variations and begin using new disks as soon as they are added to the array. Also, the usage of a dedicated partition improves the sequentiality of relevant data access, which amortizes the cost of reorganizations. Finally, we prove that a full-HDD CRAID array with a small distributed partition (<1.28% per disk) can compete in performance with an ideally restriped RAID-5 and a hybrid RAID-5 with a small SSD cache.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

An Empirical Study On the Recovery Speed of USB Flash Drives Utilizing Raid-5 Compared to HDDs and SSDs

Since their creation and implementation, storage drives have undergone and continue to undergo drastic changes in speed, size, and reliability. The original storage drives, known as hard disk drives (HDDs), are constructed using moving parts. The second modern type of storage drives, known as solid state drives (SSDs), are constructed using a series of silicon chips that utilize no moving parts. The third and most recent innovation in storage drives, known as USB flash drives (USBs), use only a single silicon chip to provide storage which grants them the smallest form factor of the three drive types. This study compared these three types of storage devices with a RAID-5 drive redundancy configuration. A RAID-5 configuration logically joins three or more drives of a single type using either software or hardware, a situation in which both HDDs and SSDs are frequently placed. This research placed USBs in a similar configuration to compare their functional speeds within this arrangement with two similar configurations of HDDs and SSDs. These recorded speeds were then mathematically compared with the price of the drives to determine if USBs are a cost-effective alternative to HDDs and SSDs in the current marketplace. While the testing did not demonstrate consistent results with the selected batch of USB drives, the evolutionary trajectory of storage technology promises that such devices will eventually match their peers in processing capabilities

RAIDX: RAID EXTENDED FOR HETEROGENEOUS ARRAYS

The computer hard drive market has diversified with the establishment of solid state disks (SSDs) as an alternative to magnetic hard disks (HDDs). Each hard drive technology has its advantages: the SSDs are faster than HDDs but the HDDs are cheaper. Our goal is to construct a parallel storage system with HDDs and SSDs such that the parallel system is as fast as the SSDs. Achieving this goal is challenging since the slow HDDs store more data and become bottlenecks, while the SSDs remain idle. RAIDX is a parallel storage system designed for disks of different speeds, capacities and technologies. The RAIDX hardware consists of an array of disks; the RAIDX software consists of data structures and algorithms that allow the disks to be viewed as a single storage unit that has capacity equal to the sum of the capacities of its disks, failure rate lower than the failure rate of its individual disks, and speeds close to that of its faster disks. RAIDX achieves its performance goals with the aid of its novel parallel data organization technique that allows storage data to be moved on the fly without impacting the upper level file system. We show that storage data accesses satisfy the locality of reference principle, whereby only a small fraction of storage data are accessed frequently. RAIDX has a monitoring program that identifies frequently accessed blocks and a migration program that moves frequently accessed blocks to faster disks. The faster disks are caches that store the solo copy of frequently accessed data. Experimental evaluation has shown that a HDD+SSD RAIDX array is as fast as an all-SSD array when the workload shows locality of reference

RAID Organizations for Improved Reliability and Performance: A Not Entirely Unbiased Tutorial (1st revision)

RAID proposal advocated replacing large disks with arrays of PC disks, but as the capacity of small disks increased 100-fold in 1990s the production of large disks was discontinued. Storage dependability is increased via replication or erasure coding. Cloud storage providers store multiple copies of data obviating for need for further redundancy. Varitaions of RAID based on local recovery codes, partial MDS reduce recovery cost. NAND flash Solid State Disks - SSDs have low latency and high bandwidth, are more reliable, consume less power and have a lower TCO than Hard Disk Drives, which are more viable for hyperscalers.Comment: Submitted to ACM Computing Surveys. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2306.0876

Shingled Magnetic Recording disks for Mass Storage Systems

Disk drives have seen a dramatic increase in storage density over the last five decades, but to continue the growth seems difficult if not impossible because of physical limitations. One way to increase storage density is using a shingled magnetic recording (SMR) disk. Shingled writing is a promising technique that trades off the inability to update in-place for narrower tracks and thus a much higher data density. It is particularly appealing as it can be adopted while utilizing essentially the same physical recording mechanisms currently in use. Because of its manner of writing, an SMR disk would be unable to update a written track without overwriting neighboring tracks, potentially requiring the rewrite of all the tracks to the end of a band where the end of a band is an area left unwritten to allow for a non-overlapped final track. Random reads are still possible on such devices, but the handling of writes becomes particularly critical. In this manuscript, we first look at a variety of potential workloads, drawn from real-world traces, and evaluate their impact on SMR disk models. Later, we evaluate the behavior of SMR disks when used in an array configuration or when faced with heavily interleaved workloads. Specifically, we demonstrate the dramatically different effects that different workloads can have upon the opposing approaches of remapping and restoring blocks, and how write-heavy workloads can (under the right conditions, and contrary to intuition) result in a performance advantage for an SMR disk

Data allocation in disk arrays with multiple raid levels

There has been an explosion in the amount of generated data, which has to be stored reliably because it is not easily reproducible. Some datasets require frequent read and write access. like online transaction processing applications. Others just need to be stored safely and read once in a while, as in data mining. This different access requirements can be solved by using the RAID (redundant array of inexpensive disks) paradigm. i.e., RAIDi for the first situation and RAID5 for the second situation. Furthermore rather than providing two disk arrays with RAID 1 and RAID5 capabilities, a controller can be postulated to emulate both. It is referred as a heterogeneous disk array (HDA). Dedicating a subset of disks to RAID 1 results in poor disk utilization, since RAIDi vs RAID5 capacity and bandwidth requirements are not known a priori. Balancing disk loads when disk space is shared among allocation requests, referred to as virtual arrays - VAs poses a difficult problem. RAIDi disk arrays have a higher access rate per gigabyte than RAID5 disk arrays. Allocating more VAs while keeping disk utilizations balanced and within acceptable bounds is the goal of this study. Given its size and access rate a VA\u27s width or the number of its Virtual Disks -VDs is determined. VDs allocations on physical disks using vector-packing heuristics, with disk capacity and bandwidth as the two dimensions are shown to be the best. An allocation is acceptable if it does riot exceed the disk capacity and overload disks even in the presence of disk failures. When disk bandwidth rather than capacity is the bottleneck, the clustered RAID paradigm is applied, which offers a tradeoff between disk space and bandwidth. Another scenario is also considered where the RAID level is determined by a classification algorithm utilizing the access characteristics of the VA, i.e., fractions of small versus large access and the fraction of write versus read accesses. The effect of RAID 1 organization on its reliability and performance is studied too. The effect of disk failures on the X-code two disk failure tolerant array is analyzed and it is shown that the load across disks is highly unbalanced unless in an NxN array groups of N stripes are randomly rotated

Improving capacity-performance tradeoffs in the storage tier

Data-set sizes are growing. New techniques are emerging to organize and analyze these data-sets. There is a key access pattern emerging with these new techniques, large sequential file accesses. The trend toward bigger files exists to help amortize the cost of data accesses from the storage layer, as many workloads are recognized to be I/O bound. The storage layer is widely recognized as the slowest layer in the system. This work focuses on the tradeoff one can make with that storage capacity to improve system performance. ^ Capacity can be leveraged for improved availability or improved performance. This tradeoff is key in the storage layer, as this allows for data loss prevention and bandwidth aggregation. Typically these tradeoffs do not allow much choice with regard to capacity use. This work will leverage replication as the enabling mechanism to improve the capacity-performance tradeoff in the storage tier, while still providing for availability. ^ This capacity-performance tradeoff can be made at both the local and distributed file system level. I propose two techniques that allow for an improved tradeoff of capacity. The local file system can be employed on scale-out or scale-up infrastructures to improve performance. The distributed file system is targeted at distributed frameworks, such as MapReduce, to improve the cluster performance. The local file system design is MorphStore, and the distributed file system is BoostDFS. ^ MorphStore is a file system that significantly improves performance when accessing large files by using two innovations. MorphStore combines (a) load-adaptive I/O access scheduling to dynamically optimize throughput (aggregation), and (b) utility-xiii driven replication to best use capacity for performance. Additionally, adaptive-access scheduling can be utilized to optimize scheduling of requests (for throughput) on systems with a large number of storage devices. Replication is utilized to make available high utility files and then optimize throughput of these high utility files based on system load. ^ BoostDFS is a distributed file system that allows a better capacity-performance tradeoff via inter-node file replication. BoostDFS is built on the observation that distributed file systems currently inter-node replication for availability, but provide no mechanism to further improve performance. Replication for availability provides diminishing returns on performance, this is due to saturation of locality. BoostDFS exploits the common by improving I/O performance of these local tasks. This is done via intra-node replication by leveraging MorphStore as the local file system. This technique allows for capacity to be traded for availability as well as performance, with a small capacity overhead under constant availability. ^ Both MorphStore and BoostDFS utilize replication. Replication allows for both bandwidth aggregation and availability, This work primarily focuses on the performance utility of replication, but does not sacrifice availability in the process. These techniques provide an improved capacity-performance tradeoff while allowing the desired level of availability