MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134489155 · doi:10.14778/2535570.2488332

DAX

2013· article· en· W2134489155 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Liu, Ashraf Aboulnaga, Kenneth Salem

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEventual consistencyScalabilityCloud computingConsistency (knowledge bases)ExploitDatabaseHigh availabilityWeak consistencyStrong consistencyDistributed computingData consistencyOperating systemConsistency modelComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many applications hosted on the cloud have sophisticated data management needs that are best served by a SQL-based relational DBMS. It is not difficult to run a DBMS in the cloud, and in many cases one DBMS instance is enough to support an application's workload. However, a DBMS running in the cloud (or even on a local server) still needs a way to persistently store its data and protect it against failures. One way to achieve this is to provide a scalable and reliable storage service that the DBMS can access over a network. This paper describes such a service, which we call DAX. DAX relies on multi-master replication and Dynamo-style flexible consistency, which enables it to run in multiple data centers and hence be disaster tolerant. Flexible consistency allows DAX to control the consistency level of each read or write operation, choosing between strong consistency at the cost of high latency or weak consistency with low latency. DAX makes this choice for each read or write operation by applying protocols that we designed based on the storage tier usage characteristics of database systems. With these protocols, DAX provides a storage service that can host multiple DBMS tenants, scaling with the number of tenants and the required storage capacity and bandwidth. DAX also provides high availability and disaster tolerance for the DBMS storage tier. Experiments using the TPC-C benchmark show that DAX provides up to a factor of 4 performance improvement over baseline solutions that do not exploit flexible consistency.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207