• Where to leave the data ?

– Parallel systems
– Scalable Distributed Data Structures
– Dynamic Hash Table (P2P)
 Introduction
• Parallel machines are quite common and affordable

• Databases are growing increasingly large

– large volumes of transaction data are collected and stored for later
analysis.
– multimedia objects like images are increasingly stored in databases

• Large-scale parallel database systems increasingly used for:

– storing large volumes of data
– processing time-consuming decision-support queries
– providing high throughput for transaction processing
 Parallelism in Databases
• Data can be partitioned across multiple disks for parallel I/O.
• Individual relational operations (e.g., sort, join, aggregation) can be
executed in parallel
– data can be partitioned and each processor can work independently
on its own partition.

• Queries are expressed in high level language (SQL, translated to relational

algebra)
– makes parallelization easier.

• Different queries can be run in parallel with each other. Concurrency

control takes care of conflicts.
• Thus, databases naturally lend themselves to parallelism.
 I/O Parallelism
• Reduce the time required to retrieve relations from disk by partitioning the
relations on multiple disks.

• Horizontal partitioning – tuples of a relation are divided among many disks

such that each tuple resides on one disk.

• Partitioning techniques (number of disks = n):

Round-robin:
Send the ith tuple inserted in the relation to disk i mod n.
Hash partitioning:
– Choose one or more attributes as the partitioning attributes.
– Choose hash function h with range 0…n - 1
– Let i denote result of hash function h applied to the partitioning
attribute value of a tuple. Send tuple to disk i.
 I/O Parallelism (Cont.)
• Partitioning techniques (cont.):
• Range partitioning:
– Choose an attribute as the partitioning attribute.
– A partitioning vector [vo, v1, ..., vn-2] is chosen.
– Let v be the partitioning attribute value of a tuple. Tuples such
that vi  vi+1 go to disk I + 1. Tuples with v < v0 go to disk 0 and
tuples with v  vn-2 go to disk n-1.

E.g., with a partitioning vector [5,11], a tuple with partitioning

attribute value of 2 will go to disk 0, a tuple with value 8 will go to
disk 1, while a tuple with value 20 will go to disk2.
Comparison of Partitioning Techniques
• Evaluate how well partitioning techniques support the following types of
data access:

1.Scanning the entire relation.

2.Locating a tuple associatively – point queries.

– E.g., r.A = 25.

3.Locating all tuples such that the value of a given attribute lies within a
specified range – range queries.
– E.g., 10  r.A < 25.
 Comparison of Partitioning Techniques (Cont.)

Round robin:
• Advantages
– Best suited for sequential scan of entire relation on each query.
– All disks have almost an equal number of tuples; retrieval work is
thus well balanced between disks.

• Range queries are difficult to process

– No clustering -- tuples are scattered across all disks
 Comparison of Partitioning Techniques(Cont.)

Hash partitioning:
• Good for sequential access
– Assuming hash function is good, and partitioning attributes form a
key, tuples will be equally distributed between disks
– Retrieval work is then well balanced between disks.
• Good for point queries on partitioning attribute
– Can lookup single disk, leaving others available for answering
other queries.
– Index on partitioning attribute can be local to disk, making lookup
and update more efficient
• No clustering, so difficult to answer range queries
 Comparison of Partitioning Techniques (Cont.)

Range partitioning:
• Provides data clustering by partitioning attribute value.
• Good for sequential access
• Good for point queries on partitioning attribute: only one disk needs
to be accessed.
• For range queries on partitioning attribute, one to a few disks may
need to be accessed

 Remaining disks are available for other queries.

 Good if result tuples are from one to a few blocks.
 If many blocks are to be fetched, they are still fetched from one to a
few disks, and potential parallelism in disk access is wasted
– Example of execution skew.
 Partitioning a Relation across Disks

• If a relation contains only a few tuples which will fit into a single disk
block, then assign the relation to a single disk.

• Large relations are preferably partitioned across all the available disks.

• If a relation consists of m disk blocks and there are n disks available in

the system, then the relation should be allocated min(m,n) disks.
 Handling of Skew
• The distribution of tuples to disks may be skewed — that is, some
disks have many tuples, while others may have fewer tuples.
• Types of skew:
– Attribute-value skew.
• Some values appear in the partitioning attributes of many
tuples; all the tuples with the same value for the partitioning
attribute end up in the same partition.
• Can occur with range-partitioning and hash-partitioning.
– Partition skew.
• With range-partitioning, badly chosen partition vector may
assign too many tuples to some partitions and too few to
others.
• Less likely with hash-partitioning if a good hash-function is
chosen.
 Handling Skew in Range-Partitioning

• To create a balanced partitioning vector (assuming partitioning attribute

forms a key of the relation):
– Sort the relation on the partitioning attribute.
– Construct the partition vector by scanning the relation in sorted
order as follows.
• After every 1/nth of the relation has been read, the value of the
partitioning attribute of the next tuple is added to the partition
vector.
– n denotes the number of partitions to be constructed.
– Duplicate entries or imbalances can result if duplicates are present in
partitioning attributes.

• Alternative technique based on histograms used in practice

 Handling Skew using Histograms
 Balanced partitioning vector can be constructed from histogram in a
relatively straightforward fashion
 Assume uniform distribution within each range of the histogram
 Histogram can be constructed by scanning relation, or sampling
(blocks containing) tuples of the relation
Handling Skew Using Virtual Processor
Partitioning
• Skew in range partitioning can be handled elegantly using virtual
processor partitioning:
– create a large number of partitions (say 10 to 20 times the number of
processors)
– Assign virtual processors to partitions either in round-robin fashion or
based on estimated /ufs/mk/monet5/Linux/mTests/
cost of processing each virtual partition

• Basic idea:
– If any normal partition would have been skewed, it is very likely the
skew is spread over a number of virtual partitions
– Skewed virtual partitions get spread across a number of processors, so
work gets distributed evenly!
• Scalable Distributed Data Structures

• The leading researcher is Withold Litwin

 Why SDDSs

• Multicomputers need data structures and file

systems
• Trivial extensions of traditional structures are not
best
 hot-spots
 scalability
 parallel queries
 distributed and autonomous clients
 distributed RAM & distance to data
 What is an SDDS ?
Data are structured
records with keys  objects with an OID
 more semantics than in Unix flat-file model
 abstraction popular with applications
 allows for parallel scans
function shipping
Data are on servers
– always available for access
 Overflowing servers split into new servers
– appended to the file without informing the clients
Queries come from multiple autonomous
clients
– available for access only on their initiative
• no synchronous updates on the clients
There is no centralized directory for access
computations
 What is an SDDS ?
 Clients can make addressing errors
• Clients have less or more adequate image of the actual file
structure
Servers are able to forward the queries to the correct address
– perhaps in several messages
 Servers may send Image Adjustment Messages
• Clients do not make same error twice
• See the SDDS talk for more on it

– http://ceria.dauphine.fr/witold.html
– Or the LH* ACM-TODS paper (Dec. 96)
 An SDDS
growth through splits under inserts

Servers

Clients
 An SDDS
growth through splits under inserts

Servers

Clients
 An SDDS
growth through splits under inserts

Servers

Clients
 An SDDS
growth through splits under inserts

Servers

Clients
 An SDDS
growth through splits under inserts

Servers

Clients
 An SDDS

Clients
 An SDDS

Clients
 An SDDS

Clients
 An SDDS

Clients
 An SDDS

Clients
 Known SDDSs

DS
SDDS Classics
(1993)

Hash m-d trees

1-d tree
k-RP*
LH* dPi-tree
DDH Nardelli-tree
Breitbart & al
RP*
Kroll & Widmayer
Breitbart & Vingralek
H-Avail.

LH*m, LH*g
LH*SA Security
LH*s

LH*RS
 LH* ( A classic)

• Allows for the primary key (OID) based hash files

– generalizes the LH addressing schema
• variants used in Netscape products, LH-Server, Unify,
Frontpage, IIS, MsExchange...
• Typical load factor 70 - 90 %
• In practice, at most 2 forwarding messages
– regardless of the size of the file
• In general, 1 m/insert and 2 m/search on the
average
• 4 messages in the worst case
• Search time of 1 ms (10 Mb/s net), of 150 s (100
Mb/s net) and of 30 s (Gb/s net)
 High-availability LH* schemes
• In a large multicomputer, it is unlikely that all
servers are up
• Consider the probability that a bucket is up is 99 %
– bucket is unavailable 3 days per
year
• If one stores every key in only 1 bucket
– case of typical SDDSs, LH*
included
• Then file reliability : probability that n-bucket file is
entirely up is:
• 37 % for n = 100
• 0 % for n = 1000
• Acceptable for yourself ?
 High-availability LH* schemes
• Using 2 buckets to store a key, one may expect the
reliability of:
– 99 % for n = 100
– 91 % for n = 1000
• High-availability files
– make data available despite
unavailability of some servers
• RAIDx, LSA, EvenOdd, DATUM...
• High-availability SDDS
– make sense
– are the only way to reliable large SDDS files
• P2P datastructures
Chord lookup algorithm properties

• Interface: lookup(key)  IP address

• Efficient: O(log N) messages per lookup
– N is the total number of servers
• Scalable: O(log N) state per node
• Robust: survives massive failures
• Simple to analyze
Chord Hashes a Key to its Successor
Key ID Node ID N10 K5, K10

K100 N100
Circular
ID Space N32 K11, K30

K65, K70 N80

N60 K33, K40, K52

• Successor: node with next highest ID

 Basic Lookup

N5

N10
N110 “Where is key 50?”

N20
N99
“Key 50 is
N32
At N60”

N40
N80

N60

• Lookups find the ID’s predecessor

• Correct if successors are correct
 Successor Lists Ensure Robust
Lookup10, 20, 32
N5

N10
20, 32, 40
5, 10, 20 N110

N20
32, 40, 60
110, 5, 10 N99
N32
40, 60, 80

N40 60, 80, 99

99, 110, 5 N80

N60 80, 99, 110

• Each node remembers r successors

• Lookup can skip over dead nodes to find blocks
Chord “Finger Table” Accelerates
Lookups
¼ ½

1/8

1/16
1/32
1/64
1/128
N80
Chord lookups take O(log N) hops
N5

N10
N110 K19
N20
N99
N32 Lookup(K19)

N80

N60