1 / 25

EnsemBlue: Integrating Distributed Storage and Consumer Electronics

EnsemBlue: Integrating Distributed Storage and Consumer Electronics. Daniel Peek and Jason Flinn University of Michigan. Bringing Distributed Systems Home. Distributed systems ignore Consumer Electronic Devices (CEDs) Much user interaction is through CEDs

norah
Download Presentation

EnsemBlue: Integrating Distributed Storage and Consumer Electronics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EnsemBlue: Integrating Distributed Storage and Consumer Electronics Daniel Peek and Jason Flinn University of Michigan

  2. Bringing Distributed Systems Home • Distributed systems ignore Consumer Electronic Devices (CEDs) • Much user interaction is through CEDs • Integrate CEDs into distributed systems University of Michigan

  3. CED Integration Difficult • Application-specific resources • Heterogeneous interfaces • Closed platforms • Cannot execute our code University of Michigan

  4. Today University of Michigan

  5. EnsemBlue • Hypothesis: Distributed file systems can help manage CEDs and multimedia My Data My Devices University of Michigan

  6. EnsemBlue • Based on BlueFS [Nightingale 04] • Client-server design • Single namespace • Supports mobile clients • Designed for small group of users File Server University of Michigan

  7. Outline • Motivation • Device-Specific Namespaces • Device-Specific Functionality • Disconnected Collections of Devices • Evaluation • Conclusion University of Michigan

  8. DFS Protocol Connecting CEDs • CEDs cannot perform DFS protocol Distributed File System Device-Specific Protocol Device-Specific Protocol DFS Protocol? • Attach: computer speaks for CED • Works with disconnected clients University of Michigan

  9. F01 Classical F02 F03 Jazz F04 Device-Specific Namespaces • User prefers one organization • CED requires another organization University of Michigan

  10. Device-Specific Namespaces • Where to store the mapping? • Cannot store in DFS due to partial caching • Make CEDs self-describing University of Michigan

  11. Receipts • What should mapping look like? ~dpeek/classical/song.mp3 /iPod/f27/ABCD.mp3 Object 1.123.46F2 • Path lookups may fail with partial caching • Receipts bypass path resolution University of Michigan

  12. Device-Specific Execution • Updating indexes • Transcoding • Type-specific caching • Organizers University of Michigan

  13. Device-Specific Execution • Cannot execute on CED • Leverage general computers • Take action when files change • Problem: Need notification of file changes University of Michigan

  14. Notification Via Persistent Queries • Don’t need new mechanism • Leverage cache consistency mechanism • Structure notifications as file system object • Robust to crash • Handles disconnected operation updates truncate *.mp3 read process University of Michigan

  15. Persistent Queries • Example: M4A to MP3 transcoder File Server M4A MP3 M4A M4A to MP3 Transcoder *.m4a M4A MP3 MP3 *.m4a University of Michigan

  16. Disconnected Devices • Server gives safety, availability, consistency • Server mediates communication File Server University of Michigan

  17. Disconnected Devices • Disconnected devices cannot interact! File Server University of Michigan

  18. Disconnected Devices • Peer-to-Peer better supports mobility • CEDs store and forward updates File Server University of Michigan

  19. ? ? Ensembles • Ensembles can avoid these problems • Select a pseudo file server • Consistent view of all files • Improved data access • Update propagation Pseudo File Server University of Michigan

  20. Outline • Motivation • Device-Specific Namespaces • Device-Specific Functionality • Disconnected Collections of Devices • Evaluation • Conclusion University of Michigan

  21. Microbenchmarks • Persistent query execution is fast • <200 ms for 1,000s of matches, GBs of data • Persistent queries have low overhead • Negligible even for 10,000 queries • Ensemble formation as fast as 20 ms • Proportional to data transfer size University of Michigan

  22. Organizing My Photos File Server *.jpg Photo Organizer iCal University of Michigan

  23. Managing My Music File Server MP3 DB MP3 DB MP3 DB *.mp3 iPod DB Updater MP3 DB MP3 University of Michigan

  24. Conclusion • Added CEDs to distributed systems • Device-specific data organization • Device-specific functionality • Supports TiVo, iPod, digital cameras, media players, cell phones, PDAs University of Michigan

  25. Questions ? University of Michigan

More Related