ABSTRACT
We compare two high-availability techniques for recovery from media failures in database systems. Both techniques achieve high availability by having two copies of all data and indexes, so that recovery is immediate. “Mirrored declustering” spreads two copies of each relation across two identical sets of disks. “Interleaved declustering” spreads two copies of each relation across one set of disks while keeping both copies of each tuple on separate disks. Both techniques pay the same costs of doubling storage requirements and requiring updates to be applied to both copies.
Mirroring offers greater simplicity and universality. Recovery can be implemented at lower levels of the system software (e.g., the disk controller). For architectures that do not share disks globally, it allows global and local cluster indexes to be independent. Also, mirroring does not require data to be declustered (i.e., spread over multiple disks).
Interleaved declustering offers significant improvements in recovery time, mean time to loss of both copies of some data, throughput during normal operation, and response time during recovery. For all architectures, interleaved declustering enables data to be spread over twice as many disks for improved load balancing. We show how tuning for interleaved declustering is simplified because it is dependent only on a few parameters that are usually well known for a specific workload and system configuration.
- Ano85.Anon. et al, "A Measure of Transaction Processing Power," Datamation, Vol. 31.7, April 1 ( 985). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Att84.R. Attar, P. Bernstein and N. Goodman, "Site Initialization, Recovery And Backup In A Distributed Database System," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE--10, No. 6 (November 1984).Google Scholar
- Bit88.D. Bitton and J. Gray, "Disk Shadowing," Proceedings of VLDB, Los Angeles (August 1988). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cop88.G. Copeland, W. Alexander, E. Boughter and T. Keller, "Data Placement In Bubba," Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD (May 1988). Google ScholarDigital Library
- DeW86.D.J. DeWitt, R.H. Gerber, G. Graefe, M.H. Heytens, K.B Kumar and M. Muralikrishna, "GAMMA---A High Performance Dataflow Database Machine," Proceedings of VLDB, Japan (August 1986). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gra78.J.N. Gray, "Notes on Database Operating Systems," in Operating Systems: An Advanced Course, Springer-Verlag, New York (1978). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kat88.R. Katz, J. Ousterhout, D. Patterson and M. Stonebraker, "A Project On High Performance I/O Subsystems," Database Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Vol. 11, No. 1 (March 1988).Google Scholar
- Kat78.J.A. Katzman, "A Fauk-Tolerant Computing System," Proceedings of the Eleventh Hawaii Conference on System Sciences," (January 1978).Google Scholar
- Kle76.L. Kleinrock, Queuing Systems, Volume 1: Theory, and Queuing Systems, Volume 2: Computer Applications, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 119-126 (1976).Google Scholar
- Liv87.M. Livny, S. Khoshafian, H. Boral, "Multi-Disk Management Algorithms," ACM SIGMETRICS Conference (1987). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Par86.A. Park and K. Balasubramanian, "Providing Fault Tolerance In Parallel Secondary Storage Systems," Computer Science TR 057-86, Princeton University (November 1986).Google Scholar
- Pat87.D.A. Patterson, G. Gibson and R.H. Katz, "A Case For Redundant Arrays Of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)," Report No. UCB/CSD 87/391, U.C. Berkeley Computer Science Division (December 1987) and Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD, Chicago (May 1988). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sto86.M. Stonebreaker, "The Case For Shared Nothing," Database Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1986).Google Scholar
- Tan87.The Tandem Database Group, "NonStop SQL, A Distributed, High-Performance, High-Availability Implementation of SQL," Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems, Asilomar, CA (September 1987). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ter85."DBC/1012 Data Base Computer System Manual, Release 1.3," C10-0001--01, Teradata Corp., Los Angeles (February 1985).Google Scholar
Index Terms
A comparison of high-availability media recovery techniques
Recommendations
A comparison of high-availability media recovery techniques
We compare two high-availability techniques for recovery from media failures in database systems. Both techniques achieve high availability by having two copies of all data and indexes, so that recovery is immediate. “Mirrored declustering” spreads two ...
Local Recovery for High Availability in Strongly Consistent Cloud Services
Emerging cloud-based network services must deliver both good performance and high availability. Achieving both of these goals requires content replication across multiple sites. Many cloud-based services either require or would benefit from the ...
Database high availability using SHADOW systems
SoCC '15: Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Symposium on Cloud ComputingHot standby techniques are widely used to implement highly available database systems. These techniques make use of two separate copies of the database, an active copy and a backup that is managed by the standby. The two database copies are stored ...
Comments