2026-09-19T03:26:48Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/request

oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/823752022-01-13T07:54:01Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023

Samuel R. Madden. Tu, Stephen Lyle Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 2013-11-18T19:15:24Z 2013-11-18T19:15:24Z 2013 2013 http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/82375 862074778 Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2013. Cataloged from PDF version of thesis. Includes bibliographical references (p. 55-57). Though modern multicore machines have sufficient RAM and processors to manage very large in-memory databases, it is not clear what the best strategy for dividing work among cores is. Should each core handle a data partition, avoiding the overhead of concurrency control for most transactions (at the cost of increasing it for cross-partition transactions)? Or should cores access a shared data structure instead? We investigate this question in the context of a fast in-memory database. We describe a new transactionally consistent database storage engine called MAFLINGO. Its cache-centered data structure design provides excellent base key-value store performance, to which we add a new, cache-friendly serializable protocol and support for running large, read-only transactions on a recent snapshot. On a key-value workload, the resulting system introduces negligible performance overhead as compared to a version of our system with transactional support stripped out, while achieving linear scalability versus the number of cores. It also exhibits linear scalability on TPC-C, a popular transactional benchmark. In addition, we show that a partitioning-based approach ceases to be beneficial if the database cannot be partitioned such that only a small fraction of transactions access multiple partitions, making our shared-everything approach more relevant. Finally, based on a survey of results from the literature, we argue that our implementation substantially outperforms previous main-memory databases on TPC-C benchmarks. by Stephen Lyle Tu. S.M. 57 p. eng Massachusetts Institute of Technology M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission. http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582 Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Fast transactions for multicore in-memory databases Thesis application/pdf false Publication unknown unknown <Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="fc3485b2-4dd3-4306-a5e1-e9d46a0702cc"> <Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type> <Language>eng</Language> <Title>Fast transactions for multicore in-memory databases</Title> <PublishedIn> <Publication> </Publication> </PublishedIn> <PublicationDate>2013</PublicationDate> <Authors> <Author> <DisplayName>Tu, Stephen Lyle</DisplayName> <Affiliation> <OrgUnit> </OrgUnit> </Affiliation> </Author> </Authors> <Editors> </Editors> <Publishers> <Publisher> <DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName> <OrgUnit /> </Publisher> </Publishers> <License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License> <Keyword>Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.</Keyword> <Abstract>Though modern multicore machines have sufficient RAM and processors to manage very large in-memory databases, it is not clear what the best strategy for dividing work among cores is. Should each core handle a data partition, avoiding the overhead of concurrency control for most transactions (at the cost of increasing it for cross-partition transactions)? Or should cores access a shared data structure instead? We investigate this question in the context of a fast in-memory database. We describe a new transactionally consistent database storage engine called MAFLINGO. Its cache-centered data structure design provides excellent base key-value store performance, to which we add a new, cache-friendly serializable protocol and support for running large, read-only transactions on a recent snapshot. On a key-value workload, the resulting system introduces negligible performance overhead as compared to a version of our system with transactional support stripped out, while achieving linear scalability versus the number of cores. It also exhibits linear scalability on TPC-C, a popular transactional benchmark. In addition, we show that a partitioning-based approach ceases to be beneficial if the database cannot be partitioned such that only a small fraction of transactions access multiple partitions, making our shared-everything approach more relevant. Finally, based on a survey of results from the literature, we argue that our implementation substantially outperforms previous main-memory databases on TPC-C benchmarks.</Abstract> <Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" > </Access> </Publication>