Most distributed and multiprocessor recovery schemes proposed in the literature are designed to tolerate arbitrary number of failures. In this paper, we demonstrate that, it is often advantageous to use "two-level" recovery schemes. A two-level recovery scheme tolerates the more probable failures with low performance overhead, while the less probable failures may be tolerated with a higher overhead. By minimizing the overhead for the more frequently occurring failure scenarios, our approach is expected to achieve lower performance overhead (on average) as compared to existing recovery schemes.To demonstrate the advantages of two-level recovery, we evaluate the performance of a recovery scheme that takes two different types of checkpoints, namely, 1-checkpoints and N -checkpoints. A single failure can be tolerated by rolling the system back to a 1-checkpoint, while multiple failure recovery is possible by rolling back to an N -checkpoint. For such a system, we demonstrate that to minimize the average overhead, it is often necessary to take both 1-checkpoints and N -checkpoints.While the conclusions of this paper are intuitive, the work on design of appropriate recovery schemes is lacking. The objective of this paper is to motivate research into recovery schemes that can provide multiple levels of fault tolerance.
Loading next page...
If you're having problem loading pages
Try our single-page mode to load one page at a time
End of preview. The entire article is 10 pages. To view the full-text, please rent this article to continue.
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/a-case-for-two-level-distributed-recovery-schemes-EnnUi4t9ie
Welcome to DeepDyve! Rent Premier Research Articles and Save Up to 90%
A case for two-level distributed recovery schemes
Vaidya, Nitin H.
Follow ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review
, Volume 23 (1)
Association for Computing Machinery – May 1, 1995
More Info
More Like This Article
View All dataSource[]=actageo&dataSource[]=aspet&dataSource[]=aaos&dataSource[]=aacc&dataSource[]=aacr&dataSource[]=aea&dataSource[]=aip&dataSource[]=ajnr&dataSource[]=ams&dataSource[]=aps_physical&dataSource[]=appi_book&dataSource[]=appi_journal&dataSource[]=apha&dataSource[]=asip&dataSource[]=asm&dataSource[]=asn&dataSource[]=aspb&dataSource[]=annual_reviews&dataSource[]=arxiv&dataSource[]=acm&dataSource[]=berghahn&dataSource[]=cabi&dataSource[]=clinical_trials&dataSource[]=dailymed&dataSource[]=degruyter&dataSource[]=du_press&dataSource[]=esa&dataSource[]=eu_press&dataSource[]=elsevier&dataSource[]=emerald&dataSource[]=ejtr&dataSource[]=emea&dataSource[]=epo&dataSource[]=faseb&dataSource[]=gsa&dataSource[]=health_affairs&dataSource[]=hindawi&dataSource[]=imanager&dataSource[]=imedpub&dataSource[]=informa_healthcare&dataSource[]=informs&dataSource[]=iop&dataSource[]=iucr&dataSource[]=iospress&dataSource[]=jbjs&dataSource[]=leftcoast&dataSource[]=lu_press&dataSource[]=mesharpe&dataSource[]=mary_ann_liebert&dataSource[]=medline&dataSource[]=mit_press&dataSource[]=nature&dataSource[]=oxford&dataSource[]=pier_professional&dataSource[]=pnas&dataSource[]=portlandpress&dataSource[]=psyc_articles&dataSource[]=psyc_books&dataSource[]=psyc_critiques&dataSource[]=plos_journal&dataSource[]=pubmed_central&dataSource[]=rsna&dataSource[]=rockefeller&dataSource[]=rcn&dataSource[]=ria&dataSource[]=sage&dataSource[]=spie&dataSource[]=springer_journal&dataSource[]=springer&dataSource[]=taylor_francis&dataSource[]=aps&dataSource[]=the_scientist&dataSource[]=uc_press&dataSource[]=uspto_abstract&dataSource[]=wiley&dataSource[]=pct
© 2012 DeepDyve, Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
