Evaluating Transport Protocols for Real-Time Event Stream Processing Middleware and Applications

  • Joe Hoffert
  • Douglas C. Schmidt
  • Aniruddha Gokhale
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5870)

Abstract

Real-time event stream processing (RT-ESP) applications must synchronize continuous data streams despite fluctuations in resource availability. Satisfying these needs of RT-ESP applications requires predictable QoS from the underlying publish/subscribe (pub/sub) middleware. If a transport protocol is not capable of meeting the QoS requirements within a dynamic environment, the middleware must be flexible enough to tune the existing transport protocol or switch to a transport protocol better suited to the changing operating conditions.

Realizing such adaptive RT-ESP pub/sub middleware requires a thorough understanding of how different transport protocols behave under different operating conditions. This paper makes three contributions to work on achieving that understanding. First, we define ReLate2, which is an evaluation metric that combines packet latency and reliability to evaluate transport protocol performance. Second, we use the ReLate2 metric to quantify the performance of various transport protocols integrated with the OMG’s Data Distribution Service (DDS) QoS-enabled pub/sub middleware standard using our FLEXibleMiddleware AndTransports (FLEXMAT) prototype for experiments that capture performance data. Third, we use ReLate2 to pinpoint configurations involving sending rate, network loss, and number of receivers that show the pros and cons of the protocols.

Keywords

Pub/Sub Middleware Data Distribution Service Transport Protocols Metrics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bai, Y., Ito, M.: A new technique for minimizing network loss from users’ perspective. Journal of Network Computing Appllications 30(2), 637–649 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai, Y., Ito, M.R.: A Study for Providing Better Quality of Service to VoIP Users. In: 20th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA 2006), April 2006. LNCS, vol. 3410, pp. 799–804. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boonma, P., Suzuki, J.: Middleware support for pluggable non-functional properties in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE Congress on Services - Part I, pp. 360–367 (July 2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Plale, B., et al.: CASA and LEAD: Adaptive Cyberinfrastructure for Real-Time Multiscale Weather Forecasting. Computer 39(11), 56–64 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tselikis, C., et al.: An evaluation of the middleware’s impact on the performance of object oriented distributed systems. Journal of Systems and Software 80(7), 1169–1181 (2007); Dynamic Resource Management in Distributed Real-Time SystemsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schmidt, D., et al.: Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: Patterns for Concurrent and Networked Objects, vol. 2. Wiley & Sons, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gamma, E., et al.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eisenhauer, G., et al.: Publish-subscribe for high-performance computing. Internet Computing, IEEE 10(1), 40–47 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kirschberg, J., et al.: Rccmp: reliable congestion controlled multicast protocol. In: 1st EuroNGI COnference on Next Generation Internet Networks Traffic Engineering (April 2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sachs, K., et al.: Performance Evaluation of Message-oriented Middleware using the SPECjms2007 Benchmark. Performance Evaluation (to appear, 2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balakrishnan, M., et al.: Slingshot: Time-critical multicast for clustered applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Network Computing and Applications (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Balakrishnan, M., et al.: Ricochet: Lateral error correction for time-critical multicast. In: NSDI 2007: Fourth Usenix Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, Boston, MA (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bateman, M., et al.: A comparison of tcp behaviour at high speeds using ns-2 and linux. In: CNS 2008: Proceedings of the 11th communications and networking simulation symposium, pp. 30–37. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ngatman, M., et al.: Comprehensive study of transmission techniques for reducing packet loss and delay in multimedia over ip. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security 8(3), 292–299 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xiong, M., et al.: Evaluating Technologies for Tactical Information Management in Net-Centric Systems. In: Proceedings of the Defense Transformation and Net-Centric Systems conference, Orlando, Florida (April 2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bellavista, P., et al.: Context-aware handoff middleware for transparent service continuity in wireless networks. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 3(4), 439–466 (2007); Middleware for Pervasive ComputingCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Floyd, S., et al.: A reliable multicast framework for light-weight sessions and application level framing. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 5(6), 784–803 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kumar, V., et al.: Distributed stream management using utility-driven self-adaptive middleware. In: Proceedings of Second International Conference on Autonomic Computing, ICAC 2005, pp. 3–14 (June 2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cheng, X., et al.: Performance evaluation of video streaming in multihop wireless mesh networks. In: NOSSDAV 2008: Proceedings of the 18th International Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video, pp. 57–62. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tanaka, Y., et al.: Design, Implementation and Performance Evaluation of GridRPC Programming Middleware for a Large-Scale Computational Grid. In: GRID 2004: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE/ACM International Workshop on Grid Computing, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 298–305. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joe Hoffert
    • 1
  • Douglas C. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Aniruddha Gokhale
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Software Integrated Systems, Dept. of EECSVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations