<i>Mist</i>: Efficient Dissemination of Erasure-Coded Data in Data Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data centers store a massive amount of data in a large number of servers built by commodity hardware. To maintain data integrity against server failures, erasure codes have been extensively deployed in modern data centers to provide a higher level of failure tolerance with less storage overhead than replication. Yet, compared to replication, disseminating erasure-coded data from a source server into multiple servers will also take significantly more time. In this paper, we design and implement Mist, a new mechanism for disseminating erasure-coded data efficiently to multiple receiving servers (receivers) in data centers. Mist speeds up the dissemination process by building an efficient topology among the receivers with heterogeneous performance, so that coded data can be received from other receivers in a pipelined fashion, rather than directly from the source. Mist flexibly supports a wide range of erasure codes, without imposing constraints to the range of system parameters, and can be extended for specific erasure codes with better performance by taking advantage of the corresponding erasure code. We have implemented Mist in Python, and our experimental results in Amazon EC2 have demonstrated that the dissemination time can be reduced by up to 96.3 percent with different kinds of erasure codes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".