MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924303716 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2001.933718

Scalability of computer clusters

2002· article· en· W1924303716 on OpenAlexaff
Vu Anh Nguyen, Samuel Pierre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityVirtual file systemFile systemNetwork File SystemComputer clusterNode (physics)Distributed computingOperating systemSelf-certifying File System

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For this study, we have chosen to work with Parallel Virtual File System (PVFS) from Clemson University; it is a distributed file system for Linux that implements wide stripping. First, we have programmed and calibrated a PVFS simulator; using this simulator, we demonstrated that PVFS has a very good scalability where the number of nodes in the cluster is smaller than a given threshold. This threshold actually corresponds to the saturation of the network bandwidth. To go beyond this limit, we propose to use wide striping and replication in the same file system. We also propose a new data distribution technique based upon "chained declustering", that warranties high availability and scalability. This also allow's the system to be improved with minimal cost, without service interruption and with a minimal degradation of service. In addition, the granularity of the file system is ideal: the size of the cluster can be adjusted to the needed performances with a precision of one node. Finally, we propose a complete architecture, using cluster of clusters, where the performances are not limited by the network performances. In order to validate our file system, we use the PVFS simulator where the improvements have been implemented. The results show that the performances of the system are close to the ideal case. Once the size of the origin cluster is well defined, the total number of nodes in the system is not limited any more, and the performances increase linearly. We have also simulated an upgrade of the system, in order to measure the perturbation caused by the update of the new nodes: it is minimal and can be controlled by priority mechanisms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207