On the impact of virtualization on Dropbox-like cloud file storage/synchronization services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Powered by cloud computing, Dropbox not only provides reliable file storage but also enables effective file synchronization and user collaboration. This new generation of service, beyond conventional client/server or peer-to-peer file hosting with storage only, has attracted a vast number of Internet users. It is however known that the synchronization delay of Dropbox-like systems is increasing with their expansion, often beyond the accepted level for practical collaboration. In this paper, we present an initial measurement to understand the design and performance bottleneck of the proprietary Dropbox system. Our measurement identifies the cloud servers/instances utilized by Dropbox, revealing its hybrid design with both Amazon's S3 (for storage) and Amazon's EC2 (for computation). The mix of bandwidth-intensive tasks (such as content delivery) and computation-intensive tasks (such as compare hash values for the contents) in Dropbox enables seamless collaboration and file synchronization among multiple users; yet their interference, revealed in our experiments, creates a severe bottleneck that prolongs the synchronization delay with virtual machines in the cloud, which has not seen in conventional physical machines. We thus re-model the resource provisioning problem in the Dropbox-like systems and present an interference-aware solution that smartly allocates the Dropbox tasks to different cloud instances. Evaluation results show that our solution remarkably reduces the synchronization delay for this new generation of file hosting service.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".