MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399969878 · doi:10.1145/3663351.3663880

Wayfinder: Speeding up Key-Value Separation by Avoiding I/O Based Indirection

2024· article· en· W4399969878 on OpenAlexafffund
Guy Khazma, Myles Thiessen, Eyal de Lara, Niv Dayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Storage Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndirectionKey (lock)Value (mathematics)Computer scienceSeparation (statistics)Programming languageComputer securityMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LSM-Trees are the backbone of modern key-value stores, supporting write-intensive workloads with balanced performance for point and range queries. Compaction in LSM-trees optimizes queries but poses significant overhead on the write path, especially for medium to large values. Key-value (KV) separation addresses this by storing values in a separate value log and pointing to them from the LSM-tree. This reduces write amplification as values are no longer rewritten during compaction. This KV separation, however, presents its own challenges. First, query performance suffers as the LSM-tree must first be searched for an address followed by querying the log for the associated value. Second, the value log requires expensive garbage collection as (1) the LSM-tree must be queried to determine whether a given value in the log is still the most recent version, and (2) a reinsertion is needed to update the LSM-tree with the addresses of the relocated KV pairs. To address these challenges, this paper investigates how to map values in the log via an in-memory hash table while using the LSM-tree to store small values and handle range queries. We implement Wayfinder on top of RocksDB and show its effectiveness in improving throughput while reducing space and write amplification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207