NearPM: A Near-Data Processing System for Storage-Class Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent Memory (PM) technologies enable both fast memory access and recovery in case of a failure. To ensure crash-consistent behavior, programs need to enforce persist ordering and employ mechanisms that introduce additional data movements such as logging, checkpointing, and shadow-paging. The emerging near-data processing (NDP) architectures can effectively reduce this overhead. In this work, we propose NearPM, a near-data processor that accelerates common, primitive operations that are crucial to crash consistency. Using these primitives, NearPM accelerates commonly-used crash-consistency mechanisms. NearPM further reduces the synchronization overheads between the NDP and the CPU by handling ordering near memory. We propose Partitioned Persist Ordering (PPO) that ensures a correct persist ordering between CPU and NDP devices, as well as among multiple NDP devices. We prototype NearPM on an FPGA platform. NearPM executes the data-intensive operations of crash-consistency mechanisms with correct ordering guarantees, while the rest of the program runs on the CPU. We evaluate nine PM workloads, each implemented in three crash consistency mechanisms: logging, checkpointing, and shadow paging. Overall, NearPM achieves 4.3 -- 9.8× speedup in the NDP-offloaded operations and 1.22 -- 1.35× speedup in the whole 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".