Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distributed database systems are widely used to meet the demands of storing and managing computation-heavy workloads. To boost performance and minimize resource and data contention, these systems require selecting a distributed physical design that determines where to place data, and which data items to replicate and partition. Deciding on a physical design is difficult as each choice poses a trade-off in the design space, and a poor choice can significantly degrade performance. Current design decisions are typically static and cannot adapt to workload changes or are unable to combine multiple design choices such as data replication and data partitioning integrally. This paper presents MorphoSys , a distributed database system that dynamically chooses, and alters, its physical design based on the workload. MorphoSys makes integrated design decisions for all of the data partitioning, replication and placement decisions on-the-fly using a learned cost model. MorphoSys provides efficient transaction execution in the face of design changes via a novel concurrency control and update propagation scheme. Our experimental evaluation, using several benchmark workloads and state-of-the-art comparison systems, shows that MorphoSys delivers excellent system performance through effective and efficient physical designs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".