MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151351790 · doi:10.1109/mascot.2002.1167063

A self-tuning page cleaner for DB2

2003· article· en· W2151351790 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsComputer scienceDisk bufferCacheDatabasePerformance tuningThroughputParallel computingOperating systemBuffer (optical fiber)AlgorithmWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The buffer pool in a DBMS is used to cache the disk pages of the database. Because typical database workloads are I/O-bound, the effectiveness of the buffer pool management algorithm is a crucial factor in the performance of the DBMS. In IBM's DB2 buffer pool, the page cleaning algorithm is used to write changed pages to disks before they are selected for replacement. We conducted a detailed study of page cleaning in DB2 version 7.1.0 for Windows by both trace-driven simulation and measurements. Our results show that system throughput can be increased by 19% when the page cleaning algorithm is carefully tuned. In practice, however the manual tuning of this algorithm is difficult. A self-tuning algorithm for page cleaning is proposed posed in this paper to automate this tuning task. Simulation results show that the self-tuning algorithm can achieve performance comparable to the best manually tuned system.

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.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207