MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790464890 · doi:10.1002/spe.2566

Recovering disk storage metrics from low‐level trace events

2018· article· en· W2790464890 on OpenAlexafffund
Houssem Daoud, Michel Dagenais

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTracingTRACE (psycholinguistics)Computer data storageBlock (permutation group theory)Stateful firewallPage faultKey (lock)Object storageDistributed computingVirtual memoryOperating systemMemory management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Block devices such as magnetic disks are nonvolatile data storage devices that transfer data in fixed‐size chunks. They are the main nonvolatile memory that holds the file system, and they are also used in virtual memory mechanisms such swapping and page fault handling. Investigating storage performance issues requires a full insight into the operating system internals. Kernel tracing offers an efficient mechanism to gather information about the storage subsystem at runtime. Still, the tracing output is often huge and difficult to analyze manually. In this paper, we introduce a framework to compute meaningful storage performance metrics from low‐level trace events generated by LTTng. A stateful approach is used to model the state of the storage subsystem. Efficient data structures and algorithms are proposed to offer a reasonable response time, allowing the user to navigate throughout the trace and to retrieve metrics from any time range. The framework includes a visualization system that provides different graphical views that represent the collected information in a convenient way. These views are synchronized together, forming a comprehensive perspective that makes storage performance investigation a much more comfortable task. Different use cases are presented to show the usefulness of the framework in real‐world applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftware Practice and ExperienceSame topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207