Advertisement

Evaluating DHT-Based Service Placement for Stream-Based Overlays

  • Peter Pietzuch
  • Jeffrey Shneidman
  • Jonathan Ledlie
  • Matt Welsh
  • Margo Seltzer
  • Mema Roussopoulos
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3640)

Abstract

Stream-based overlay networks (SBONs) are one approach to implementing large-scale stream processing systems. A fundamental consideration in an SBON is that of service placement, which determines the physical location of in-network processing services or operators, in such a way that network resources are used efficiently. Service placement consists of two components: node discovery, which selects a candidate set of nodes on which services might be placed, and node selection, which chooses the particular node to host a service. By viewing the placement problem as the composition of these two processes we can trade-off quality and efficiency between them.

We evaluate the appropriateness of using DHT routing paths for service placement in an SBON, when aiming to minimize network usage. For this, we consider two DHT-based algorithms for node discovery, which use either the union or intersection of DHT routing paths in the SBON, and compare their performance to other techniques. We show that current DHT-based schemes are actually rather poor node discovery algorithms, when minimizing network utilization. An efficient DHT may not traverse enough hops to obtain a sufficiently large candidate set for placement. The union of DHT routes may result in a low-quality set of discovered nodes that requires an expensive node selection algorithm. Finally, the intersection of DHT routes relies on route convergence, which prevents the placement of services with a large fan-in.

Keywords

Overlay Network Multicast Tree Placement Problem Placement Scheme Node Selection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abadi, D., Carney, D., Cetintemel, U., et al.: Aurora: A New Model and Architecture for Data Stream Management. In: VLDB (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abadi, D., Ahmad, Y., Balakrishnan, H., et al.: The Design of the Borealis Stream Processing Engine. Technical Report CS-04-08, Brown University (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huebsch, R., Hellerstein, J.M., Lanham, N., et al.: Querying the Internet with PIER. In: VLDB, Berlin, Germany (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibbons, P.B., Karp, B., Ke, Y., Nath, S., Seshan, S.: IrisNet: An Architecture for a World-Wide Sensor Web. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pietzuch, P., Shneidman, J., Welsh, M., Seltzer, M., Roussopoulos, M.: Path Optimization in Stream-Based Overlay Networks. Tr, Harvard University (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dabek, F., Cox, R., Kaashoek, F., Morris, R.: Vivaldi: A Decentralized Network Coordinate System. In: Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM 2004, Portland, OR (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    The Planetlab Consortium (2004), http://www.planet-lab.org
  8. 8.
    Stribling, J.: All-Pairs-Pings for PlanetLab (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zegura, E.W., Calvert, K.L., Bhattacharjee, S.: How to Model an Internetwork. In: Proc of IEEE Infocom 1996, San Francisco, CA, vol. 2, pp. 594–602 (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karp, B., Ratnasamy, S., Rhea, S., Shenker, S.: Spurring Adoption of DHTs with OpenHash, a Public DHT Service. In: Voelker, G.M., Shenker, S. (eds.) IPTPS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3279, pp. 195–205. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rhea, S., Geels, D., Roscoe, T., Kubiatowicz, J.: Handling Churn in a DHT. In: USENIX 2004, Boston, MA (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Spring, N., Wetherall, D., Anderson, T.: Scriptroute. In: USITS 2002 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castro, M., Druschel, P., Kermarrec, A.M., Rowstron, A.: Scribe: A Large-scale and Decentralized Application-level Multicast Infrastructure. JSAC 20 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shneidman, J., Pietzuch, P., Ledlie, J., Roussopoulos, M., Seltzer, M., Welsh, M.: Hourglass: An Infrastructure for Connecting Sensor Networks and Applications. Technical report, Harvard University (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen, L., Reddy, K., Agrawal, G.: GATES: A Grid-Based Middleware for Processing Distributed Data Streams. In: HPDC-13, Honolulu, Hawaii (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahmad, Y., Çetintemel, U.: Network-Aware Query Processing for Stream-based Applications. In: VLDB (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhuang, S.Q., Zhao, B.Y., Joseph, A.D., Katz, R.H., Kubiatowicz, J.: Bayeux: An Architecture for Scalable and Fault-tolerant Wide-Area Data Dissemination. In: NOSSDAV (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Pietzuch
    • 1
  • Jeffrey Shneidman
    • 1
  • Jonathan Ledlie
    • 1
  • Matt Welsh
    • 1
  • Margo Seltzer
    • 1
  • Mema Roussopoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations