EECS 482 Introduction to Operating Systems

Transcription

1 EECS 482 Introduction to Operating Systems Winter 2018 Baris Kasikci (Thanks, Harsha Madhyastha and Jason Flinn for the slides!)

2 Distributed file systems Remote storage of data that appears local Examples: AFS Dropbox Google Drive Benefits?

3 Client-server design Copy of every file stored on server FS operations (read/write/etc.) are RPCs Client Server Client Write A OK Read A Data Downsides? EECS 482 Lecture 24

4 Caching for performance Can cache file system data at client: In memory (e.g., NFS) On disk (e.g., AFS) Benefits of client-side caching: Improves server scalability Better latency and throughput Reduces network traffic Can improve availability (disconnected operation)

5 Client-side caching Migrate or replicate: Migrate: Transfer sole copy from server to client Replicate: Create additional copy at client

6 Pessimistic concurrency ctrl. How to prevent inconsistency? Obtain lock before accessing data Similar to reader-writer locks 3 states for each replica: Invalid: no cached copy Shared: may read cached copy Exclusive: may read/write cached copy

7 State machine for cached copy invalid this client writes the file another client writes the file this client reads the file another client writes the file exclusive this client writes the file another client reads the file shared

8 Invalidation protocol Client Server Client Read file Shared? A Shared? A Shared, val=a Shared, val=a Write file Exclusive? Invalidate Read file A B Ack Downgrade Ack Shared? Read file Ack, val=b B Ack, val=b B

9 Order of operations Necessary to wait for invalidations? Client Server Client Read file Shared? A Shared? A Shared, val=a Shared, val=a Write file Exclusive? Invalidate Read file A B Downgrade Shared? Read file Ack, val=b B Ack, val=b B

10 Order of operations Necessary to wait for invalidations? Client Server Client Read file Shared? A Shared? A Shared, val=a Shared, val=a Write file Exclusive? Invalidate B Read file A Read file (A not B!)

11 Optimistic concurrency ctrl. How to prevent inconsistency? Allow clients to modify replicas freely Server detects and resolves conflicting updates How to detect conflicts Assign a version to each object (file, etc.) Increment the version on update Conflict if server version >= client version

12 Conflicting operations Client Fetch Read file data,ver=1 1 Write file Server Client 1 Fetch data,ver=1 Read file 1 Write file 2 Write,ver=2 Write,ver=2 2 2

13 Resolving conflicts Possible strategies? Last writer wins (AFS) Create multiple versions Automatically merge updates (git) Manually merge updates (also git sigh) Jim Gray: no free lunch You either block on a lock or create a conflict Are current DFS s optimistic or pessimistic?

14 Load balancing across servers Two options: Partition clients across servers Partition files across servers How to find a file?

15 Load balancing across servers A B C D E

16 Leveraging randomness Hash(server) maps to random location 0xffff 0x0000 server3 file1 file2 server1 server2 file3 file5 file4 server4

17 Adding a server Hash(server) maps to random location 0xffff 0x0000 server3 file1 file2 server1 server2 server5 file5 server4 file4 file3

18 Balancing load Some files hotter than others Equal files does not imply equal load How to mitigate?» Assign less regions to hot servers, more to cold

19 Replication across servers More servers à Likelihood of failure increases Replicate files to tolerate failures Example: Primary + backup» Write data by writing to both primary AND backup» Read data by reading from primary OR backup

20 Primary-Backup Client 1 Write Ack Primary 1 Write Ack Backup 1 Read Read

21 Handling failures When primary fails Backup becomes new primary Backup handles all reads/writes Primary recovers, syncs state, can become backup When backup fails Primary handles all reads/writes Backup recovers, syncs state

22 Fault tolerance What if backup fails before primary recovers? Data is unavailable, lost if failures permanent How can we tolerate 2 failures? Use 2 backups Need f+1 servers to tolerate f failures What are we assuming about failures?

23 Byzantine generals Say there s one commander C and two lieutenants L1 and L2 Goal: Decide whether to attack enemy or retreat Attack succeeds if at least 2 attack 1 of the 3 is a traitor Solution 1: L1 and L2 follow C s command to either attack or retreat Solution 2: C sends command to L1 and L2, who then exchange notes and follow majority

24 Byzantine generals C sends command to L1 and L2, who then exchange notes and follow majority Case 1: L2 is traitor C sends attack to both L1 and L2 L1 receives {attack, retreat} Case 2: C is traitor C sends attack to L1 and retreat to L2 L1 receives {attack, retreat}

25 Byzantine generals Need at least 4 generals to cope with 1 traitor 3f+1 generals to cope with f traitors (more on this in distributed systems classes) Solution: C sends command to L1, L2, and L3, who then exchange notes and follow majority Three cases: C sends 3 attacks C sends 2 attacks, 1 retreat C sends 1 attack, 2 retreats