MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010592244 · doi:10.1145/3373376.3378504

Hailstorm

2020· article· en· W3010592244 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent Bindschaedler, Ashvin Goel, Willy Zwaenepoel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceThroughputPoolingLatency (audio)DatabaseOperating systemTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed LSM-based databases face throughput and latency issues due to load imbalance across instances and interference from background tasks such as flushing, compaction, and data migration. Hailstorm addresses these problems by deploying the database storage engines over a distributed filesystem that disaggregates storage from processing, enabling storage pooling and compaction offloading. Hailstorm pools storage devices within a rack, allowing each storage engine to fully utilize the aggregate rack storage capacity and bandwidth. Storage pooling successfully handles load imbalance without the need for resharding. Hailstorm offloads compaction tasks to remote nodes, distributing their impact, and improving overall system throughput and response time. We show that Hailstorm achieves load balance in many MongoDB deployments with skewed workloads, improving the average throughput by 60%, while decreasing tail latency by as much as 5X. In workloads with range queries, Hailstorm provides up to 22X throughput improvements. Hailstorm also enables cost savings of 47-56% in OLTP workloads.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.020

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations49
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207