MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121619739 · doi:10.1109/icde55515.2023.00097

Real-Time LSM-Trees for HTAP Workloads

2023· article· en· W3121619739 on OpenAlexaff
Hemant Saxena, Lukasz Golab, Stratos Idreos, Ihab F. Ilyas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOnline analytical processingOnline transaction processingMerge (version control)WorkloadAnalyticsParallel computingData structureDatabaseOperating systemReal-time computingDistributed computingData warehouseTransaction processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time analytics systems employ hybrid data layouts in which data are stored in different formats throughout their lifecycle. Recent data are stored in a row-oriented format to serve OLTP workloads and support high insert rates, while older data are transformed to a column-oriented format for OLAP access patterns. We observe that a Log-Structured Merge (LSM) Tree is a natural fit for a lifecycle-aware storage engine due to its high write throughput and level-oriented structure, in which records propagate from one level to the next over time. To build a lifecycle-aware storage engine using an LSM-Tree, we make a crucial modification to allow different data layouts in different levels, ranging from purely row-oriented to purely column-oriented, leading to a Real-Time LSM-Tree. We give a cost model and an algorithm to design a Real-Time LSM-Tree that is suitable for a given workload, followed by an experimental evaluation of LASER - a prototype implementation of our idea built on top of the RocksDB key-value store.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207