skip to main content
10.1145/2465529.2465543acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmetricsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A mean field model for a class of garbage collection algorithms in flash-based solid state drives

Published:17 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Garbage collection (GC) algorithms play a key role in reducing the write amplification in flash-based solid state drives, where the write amplification affects the lifespan and speed of the drive. This paper introduces a mean field model to assess the write amplification and the distribution of the number of valid pages per block for a class C of GC algorithms. Apart from the Random GC algorithm, class C includes two novel GC algorithms: the d-Choices GC algorithm, that selects d blocks uniformly at random and erases the block containing the least number of valid pages among the $d$ selected blocks, and the Random++ GC algorithm, that repeatedly selects another block uniformly at random until it finds a block with a lower than average number of valid blocks. Using simulation experiments we show that the proposed mean field model is highly accurate in predicting the write amplification (for drives with $N=50000$ blocks). We further show that the d-Choices GC algorithm has a write amplification close to that of the Greedy GC algorithm even for small d values, e.g., d = 10, and offers a more attractive trade-off between its simplicity and its performance than the Windowed GC algorithm introduced and analyzed in earlier studies. The Random++ algorithm is shown to be less effective as it is even inferior to the FIFO algorithm when the number of pages $b$ per block is large (e.g., for b ≥ 64).

References

  1. R. Agarwal and M. Marrow. A closed-form expression for write amplification in NAND flash. In IEEE GLOBECOM Workshops (GC Wkshps), pages 1846--1850, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Y. Azar, A.Z. Broder, A.R. Karlin, and E. Upfal. Balanced allocations. In SIAM Journal on Computing, pages 593--602, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Ban. Wear leveling of static areas in flash memory. US patent 6,732,221. Filed June 1, 2001; Issued May 4, 2004; Assigned to M-Systems., 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Benaım and J. Le Boudec. A class of mean field interaction models for computer and communication systems. Performance Evaluation, 65(11--12):823--838, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. W. Bux and I. Iliadis. Performance of greedy garbage collection in flash-based solid-state drives. Perform. Eval., 67(11):1172--1186, November 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. F. Chen, D.A. Koufaty, and X. Zhang. Understanding intrinsic characteristics and system implications of flash memory based solid state drives. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., 37(1):181--192, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. P. Desnoyers. Analytic modeling of SSD write performance. In Proceedings of International Systems and Storage Conference (SYSTOR 2012), 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. X. Hu, E. Eleftheriou, R. Haas, I. Iliadis, and R. Pletka. Write amplification analysis in flash-based solid state drives. In Proceedings of SYSTOR 2009: The Israeli Experimental Systems Conference, SYSTOR '09, pages 10:1--10:9, New York, NY, USA, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J.-U. Kang, H. Jo, J.-S. Kim, and J. Lee. A superblock-based flash translation layer for NAND flash memory. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM & IEEE International conference on Embedded software, EMSOFT '06, pages 161--170, New York, NY, USA, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Y. Li, P.P.C. Lee, and J.C.S. Lui. Stochastic modeling of large-scale solid-state storage systems: Analysis, design tradeoffs and optimization. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., 41(1), 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Menon. A performance comparison of RAID-5 and log-structured arrays. In Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, HPDC '95, pages 167--178, Washington, DC, USA, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M. Mitzenmacher, A. Richa, and R. Sitaraman. The power of two random choices: a survey of techniques and results. Handbook of Randomized Computing, 1, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J.T. Robinson. Analysis of steady-state segment storage utilizations in a log-structured file system with least-utilized segment cleaning. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev., 30(4):29--32, October 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. Rosenblum and J. K. Ousterhout. The design and implementation of a log-structured file system. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 10(1):26--52, February 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. N.D. Vvedenskaya, R.L. Dobrushin, and F.I. Karpelevich. Queueing system with selection of the shortest of two queues: an asymptotic approach. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 32:15--27, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. L. Xiang and B. Kurkoski. An improved analytical expression for write amplification in NAND flash. In International Conference on Computing, Networking, and Communications (ICNC), pages 497--501, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A mean field model for a class of garbage collection algorithms in flash-based solid state drives

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGMETRICS '13: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS/international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems
        June 2013
        406 pages
        ISBN:9781450319003
        DOI:10.1145/2465529
        • cover image ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review
          ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review  Volume 41, Issue 1
          Performance evaluation review
          June 2013
          385 pages
          ISSN:0163-5999
          DOI:10.1145/2494232
          Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2013 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 17 June 2013

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        SIGMETRICS '13 Paper Acceptance Rate54of196submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate459of2,691submissions,17%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader