This invention generally relates to database management systems and more specifically to a methodology for splitting indexes in a distributed database management system.
Databases typically incorporate indexes for enabling the efficient retrieval of certain information. A B-tree data structure is a popular indexing structure that is optimized for use in databases that read and write large blocks of data and that enables efficient database searching. A B-Tree data structure includes a root and a plurality of leaves. The root uses a key value to identify a corresponding leaf. Each leaf points to any records that contain the key value. The key values are sorted in order, typically in a plurality of leaves thereby to form a sorted list. Specifically, a given leaf includes a “left sibling” and a “right sibling” that identify a leaf to the left of and a leaf to right of the given leaf thereby to maintain a list in sorted order. The first or left-most leaf and last or right-most leaf include entries denoting the ends of the list of leafs for that root.
Typically each leaf has a fixed memory size. When a size threshold is reached, it becomes necessary to define a key value and to “split” that leaf into “left” and “right” leafs. The “left” leaf receives values that are less than the defined key value and the “right” leaf receives the remaining values with appropriate modifications to the root. In centrally based and non-shared databases, the splitting process is efficient because generally there is only one copy of the index in the database system. The split is easy to effect by quiescing the data processing system during the actual splitting operation.
Recently there has been interest in the development of distributed databases. The above-identified U.S. Pat. No. 8,224,860 discloses an implementation of a distributed database wherein user access is provided through a network of transactional nodes and complete copies of the information in the database are only stored on archival nodes that act as storage managers and are not directly accessed by users. More specifically, a user connects to a transactional node to perform operations on the database by generating high-level queries that the transactional node processes. In this implementation a given transactional node need only contain that data and metadata as required to process queries from users connected to that node. The data and metadata are defined by an array of atom classes, such as an index class, and atoms where each atom corresponds to a different instance of the class, such as index atom for a specific index. Replications or copies of an atom may reside in multiple nodes wherein the atom copy and a given node are processed in that node at least in part independently of each other. When an atom is created at a node, it is designated as a “chairman.” The designation of a node as a chairman can be transferred to a replication of that atom in another node.
In the implementation of U.S. Pat. No. 8,224,860 asynchronous messages transfer atoms and information about atoms among the different nodes to maintain the database in a consistent and a concurrent state. Specifically each node in the database network has a unique communications path to every other node. When one node generates a message involving a specific atom, it can communicate as necessary with those other nodes that contain replications of that specific atom. Each node generates these messages independently of other nodes. So it is possible that, at any given instant, multiple nodes will contain copies of a given atom and different nodes may be at various stages of processing them. As these operations in different nodes normally are not synchronized, it is necessary to operate the database so each user is assured that interaction is with a concurrent and consistent database.
Splitting an index in a distributed database such as disclosed in the above-identified U.S. Pat. No. 8,224,860 involves splitting replications of an index atom that performs as a leaf at the transaction node requesting the split and each archival node plus any other transactional node that has a copy of that index atom. It is possible for multiple nodes to request a split of a given index whereupon a race problem can exist with an erroneous outcome. Prior methods, such as those involving quiescence, are not readily applicable to implementations of a distributed database of the type discussed above without introducing unacceptable system performance degradation. What is needed is a method for handling requests for splitting an index in a distributed database wherein copies of the index are located in multiple locations.
Therefore it is an object of this invention to provide an implementation of a distributed database that processes requests to split an index in a consistent and concurrent fashion.
Another object of this invention is to provide an implementation of a distributed database that processes requests to split an index in consistent and concurrent fashion without any significant performance degradation.
Yet another object of this invention to provide an implementation of a distributed database that processes a requested split of an index and eliminates the involvement of nodes that do not include that specific index.
In accordance with one aspect of this invention a distributed database processing system includes a plurality of nodes, each of which includes means for establishing communications with every other node wherein the database has an atom class for each category of metadata and data including an index atom class that provides an index atom for each index in the database and each index atom includes a range of key values. An index atom can be replicated to other nodes. An index atom is split when a node detects a need to split the index atom based upon a split key value that defines lower and upper portions of the index. Another node identifies a location in its index atom based upon the key value for defining the approximate lower and upper portions of the keys for the index atom, creating a second index atom as a right sibling to the first index atom, transferring the key values in the upper portion of the first index atom to the to the lower portion of the second index atom and transmitting to all other nodes with the identified index atom an index split message including the split key value. Each other node responds to the receipt of the index split message by deleting corresponding to the key values in the upper portion of the first index atom being split, retrieving the populated second index atom copy from the one node with the right sibling and sending a split done message to the one node chairman whereupon the one node broadcasts an index split done message when all other nodes have generated the split done message.
In accordance with another aspect of this invention, a distributed database management system includes a plurality of transactional and archival nodes wherein each transactional node responds to queries by interacting with a portion of the database thereat and wherein an archival node stores a version of the entire database. Communications are established at each node and every other node. The system has an atom class for each category of metadata and data including an index atom class that provides a B-Tree index atom for each index in the database. Each index atom can be replicated on demand to the archival node and at least one transactional node. One index atom in one node is designated as a chairman for that index atom. The process of splitting an index atom includes detecting at one of the transactional nodes a need to split a B-Tree index at that node and, if the node does not contain the chairman, transmitting a split index request message to the chairman node including the identification of the requesting node and a split key value. The chairman responds to its internal request for splitting the index or the receipt of the split index request message from another node by defining the contents of lower and upper portions for the index in response to the split key value, creating a second index atom as a right sibling of the index atom being split, moving the upper portion of the index for that index atom to the second index atom, and transmitting to all nodes that contain that index atom, an index split message including the split key value that defines the split for the lower and upper portions. Each non-chairman node responds by deleting from its existing index atom in response to the split key value the contents in the upper portion of the index atom being split and retrieving from the chairman the populated second index atom copy as the right sibling for the index atom being split. Each node transmits a split done message to the chairman. The chairman sends an index split done message when all nodes involved in the index split operation have reported completion to the chairman.
The appended claims particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter of this invention. The various objects, advantages and novel features of this invention will be more fully apparent from a reading of the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which like reference numerals refer to like parts, and in which:
Each node in
In this system, the classes/objects set 42 is divided into a subset 43 of “atom classes,” a subset 44 of “message classes” and a subset 45 of “helper classes.” At any given time a transactional node only contains those portions of the database that are then relevant to active user applications. Moreover, all portions of database in use at a given time at any transactional node are resident in random access memory 38. There is no need for providing supplementary storage, such as disk storage, at a transactional node during the operation of this system.
Referring to
Each atom has certain common elements and other elements that are specific to its type. For purposes of describing this invention,
Each time a copy of an atom is changed in any transactional node, it receives a new change number. Element 76E records that change number. Whenever a node requests an atom from another node, there is an interval during which time the requesting node will not be known to other transactional nodes. Element 76F is a list of all the nodes to which the supplying node must relay messages that contain the atom until the request is completed.
Operations of the database system are also divided into cycles. A cycle reference element 76G provides the cycle number of the last access to the atom. Element 76H is a list of the all active nodes that contain the atom. Element 76I includes several status indicators. Elements 76 contains a binary tree of index nodes to provide a conventional indexing function. Element 76K contains an index level. Such index structures and operations are known to those in skilled in the art.
As previously indicated, communications between any two nodes is by way of serialized messages which are transmitted asynchronously using the TCP or another protocol with controls to maintain messaging sequences.
If either the chairman or a non-chairman index node needs to be split, only the chairman controls the splitting operation. If the chairman determines that the atom 201C requires splitting, step 204 transfers control to step 205 whereupon the chairman selects a key value upon which to base the split. In
At step 207, the chairman broadcasts an Index Split Started message to all nodes having a copy of the index atom to be split. Each receiving node responds to the Index Split Started message by buffering and processing subsequent incoming messages in the nodes that include the index atom to be split. As the chairman now controls split, further operations will involve the index atom 201C.
Next, the chairman creates a new index atom at step 210 shown as an empty atom 211C in
In step 214 of
This process continues until the chairman receives Index Message Done messages from all the other nodes/atoms involved in the split operation. When this occurs, step 217 terminates the rebroadcasts of step 215 and broadcasts an Index Split Done message 161 to all the nodes with a copy of the index atom.
When a non-chairman node receives an Index Split message from the chairman, an Index Split process 220 in
Next step 224 “prunes” the right sibling by adding all its local keys from the upper portion copy 213N as also show in
Referring now to
As will now be apparent, this invention insures that an index in a distributed database can be split in a concurrent and consistent fashion even though copies of that index may exists at multiple nodes at which data processing occurs. This occurs without any need to quiesce the system so there is no significant performance degradation. Also this invention eliminates the involvement of nodes that do not include that specific index.
This invention has been disclosed in terms of certain implementations that are directed to a specific implementation of a distributed database. Although the invention is disclosed for in one specific implementation, the application to other implementations will be apparent to others without departing from the invention. Therefore, it is the intent of the appended claims to cover all such variations and modifications as come within the true spirit and scope of this invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,224,860 granted Jul. 17, 2012 for a Database Management System and assigned to the same assignee as this invention is incorporated in its entirety herein by reference. This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/215,401 filed Mar. 17, 2014, for a Distributed Database Management System with Dynamically Split B-Tree Indexes, which in turn claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/789,479 filed Mar. 15, 2013 for a Distributed Database Management System with Dynamically Split B-Tree Indexes. Each of these applications is incorporated in its entirety herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4853843 | Ecklund | Aug 1989 | A |
5446887 | Berkowitz | Aug 1995 | A |
5524240 | Barbara et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5555404 | Torbjønsen et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5568638 | Hayashi et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5625815 | Maier | Apr 1997 | A |
5701467 | Freeston | Nov 1997 | A |
5764877 | Lomet et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5806065 | Lomet | Sep 1998 | A |
5960194 | Choy et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6216151 | Antoun | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226650 | Mahajan et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6275863 | Leff et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6334125 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6401096 | Zellweger | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6424967 | Johnson et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6480857 | Chandler | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6499036 | Gurevich | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6523036 | Hickman et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6748394 | Shah et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6792432 | Kodavalla et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6862589 | Grant | Mar 2005 | B2 |
7026043 | Bleizeffer et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7080083 | Kim et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7096216 | Anonsen | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7184421 | Liu | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7219102 | Zhou et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7233960 | Boris et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7293039 | Deshmukh et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7353227 | Wu | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7395352 | Lam et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7401094 | Kesler | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7403948 | Ghoneimy et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7562102 | Sumner et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7853624 | Friedlander et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7890508 | Gerber et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
8108343 | Wang et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8122201 | Marshak | Feb 2012 | B1 |
8224860 | Starkey | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8266122 | Newcombe et al. | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8504523 | Starkey | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8756237 | Stillerman et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8930312 | Rath et al. | Jan 2015 | B1 |
9501363 | Ottavio | Nov 2016 | B1 |
9734021 | Sanocki et al. | Aug 2017 | B1 |
9824095 | Taylor et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
20020112054 | Hatanaka | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020152261 | Arkin et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152262 | Arkin et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020178162 | Ulrich et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030051021 | Hirschfeld et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030149709 | Banks | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030204486 | Berks et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030220935 | Vivian et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040153459 | Whitten | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040263644 | Ebi | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050013208 | Hirabayashi et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050086384 | Ernst | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050198062 | Shapiro | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216502 | Kaura et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060010130 | Leff et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060168154 | Zhang | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070067349 | Jhaveri et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070156842 | Vermeulen et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070288526 | Mankad | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080086470 | Graefe | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080106548 | Singer | May 2008 | A1 |
20080228795 | Lomet | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080320038 | Liege | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090113431 | Whyte | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20100094802 | Luotojarvi et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100115246 | Seshadri et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100153349 | Schroth | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100191884 | Holenstein et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100235606 | Oreland et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100297565 | Waters et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110087874 | Timashev et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110231447 | Starkey | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120254175 | Horowitz et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120136904 | Ravi | May 2012 | A1 |
20130060922 | Koponen et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130086018 | Horii | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130110766 | Promhouse et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130110774 | Shah et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130110781 | Golab et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130159265 | Peh et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159366 | Lyle et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130232378 | Resch et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130262403 | Milousheff et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130278412 | Kelly et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130311426 | Erdogan et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140108414 | Stillerman et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140279881 | Tan et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140297676 | Bhatia et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140304306 | Proctor | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20150019739 | Attaluri et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032695 | Tran et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150066858 | Sabdar et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150135255 | Theimer et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150370505 | Shuma et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160134490 | Balasubramanyan et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160306709 | Shaull | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160350357 | Palmer | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160350392 | Rice | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160371355 | Massari | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170039099 | Ottavio | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170139910 | Mcalister et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101251843 | Jun 2010 | CN |
101471845 | Jun 2011 | CN |
101268439 | Apr 2012 | CN |
002931 | Oct 2001 | EA |
1403782 | Mar 2004 | EP |
2006-048507 | Feb 2006 | JP |
2007-058275 | Mar 2007 | JP |
2003-256256 | Mar 2013 | JP |
2315349 | Jan 2008 | RU |
2008106904 | Aug 2009 | RU |
Entry |
---|
“Album Closing Policy,” Background, retrieved from the Internet at URL:http://tools/wiki/display/ENG/Album+Closing+Policy (Jan. 29, 2015), 4 pp. |
“Distributed Coordination in NuoDB,” YouTube, retrieved from the Internet at URL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=URoeHvflVKg on Feb. 4, 2015, 2 pp. |
“Glossary—NuoDB 2.1 Documentation / NuoDB,” retrieved from the Internet at URL: http://doc.nuodb.com/display/doc/Glossary on Feb. 4, 2015, 1 pp. |
“How It Works,” retrieved from the Internet at URL: http://www.nuodb.com/explore/newsql-cloud-database-how-it-works?mkt_tok=3RkMMJW on Feb. 4, 2015, 4 pp. |
“How to Eliminate MySQL Performance Issues,” NuoDB Technical Whitepaper, Sep. 10, 2014, Version 1, 11 pp. |
“Hybrid Transaction and Analytical Processing with NuoDB,” NuoDB Technical Whitepaper, Nov. 5, 2014, Version 1, 13 pp. |
“No Knobs Administration,” retrieved from the Internet at URL: http://www.nuodb.com/explore/newsql-cloud-database-product/auto-administration on Feb. 4, 2015, 4 pp. |
“Snapshot Albums,” Transaction Ordering, retrieved from the Internet at URL:http://tools/wiki/display/ENG/Snapshot+Albums (Aug. 12, 2014), 4 pp. |
“Table Partitioning and Storage Groups (TPSG),” Architect's Overview, NuoDB Technical Design Document, Version 2.0 (2014), 12 pp. |
“The Architecture & Motivation for NuoDB,” NuoDB Technical Whitepaper, Oct. 5, 2014, Version 1, 27 pp. |
“Welcome to NuoDB Swifts Release 2.1 GA,” retrieved from the Internet at URL: http:.//dev.nuodb.com/techblog/welcome-nuodb-swifts-release-21-ga on Feb. 4, 2015, 7 pp. |
“What Is A Distributed Database? And Why Do You Need One,” NuoDB Technical Whitepaper, Jan. 23, 2014, Version 1, 9 pp. |
Advisory Action issued by The United States Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, dated Jan. 10, 2017, 9 pages. |
Advisory Action dated May 2, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, 8 pages. |
Amazon CloudWatch Developer Guide API, Create Alarms That or Terminate an Instance, Jan. 2013, downloaded Nov. 16, 2016 from archive.org., pp. 1-11. |
Amazon RDS FAQs, Oct. 4, 2012, downloaded Nov. 16, 2016 from archive.org., 39 pp. |
Bergsten et al., “Overview of Parallel Architectures for Databases,” The Computer Journal vol. 36, No. 8, pp. 734-740 (1993). |
Connectivity Testing with Ping, Telnet, Trace Route and NSlookup (hereafter help.webcontrolcenter), Article ID:1757, Created: Jun. 17, 2013 at 10:45 a.m., https://help.webcontrolcenter.com/kb/a1757/connectivity-testing-with-ping-telnet-trace-route-and-nslookup.aspx, 6 pages. |
Dan et al., “Performance Comparisons of Buffer Coherency Policies,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computer Systems, IEEE Comp. Soc. Press vol. 11, pp. 208-217 (1991). |
Decision to Grant dated Nov. 14, 2016 from Belarus Patent Application No. a20121441 with English Translation, 15 pp. |
Durable Distributed Cache Architecture, retrieved from the Internet at URL: http://www.nuodb.com/explore/newsql-cloud-database-ddc-architecture on Feb. 4, 2015, 3 pp. |
Final Office Action dated Jan. 10, 2018 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, 30 pages. |
Final Office Action dated Sep. 9, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, 26 pp. |
Final Office Action dated Nov. 3, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,401, 36 pp. |
Final Office Action dated Nov. 7, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/247,364, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action dated Nov. 24, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,401, 33 pages. |
Final Office Action dated Dec. 13, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/247,364, 31 pp. |
First Examination Report issued by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office for Application No. 2,793,429, dated Feb. 14, 2017, 3 pages. |
Garding, P. “Alerting on Database Mirorring Events,” Apr. 7, 2006, downloaded Dec. 6, 2016 from technet.microsoft.com, 24 pp. |
Hull, Autoscaling Mysql On Amazon EC2, Apr. 9, 2012, 7 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Oct. 13, 2015 from PCT/US2014/033270, 4 pp. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Oct. 28, 2016 from PCT/US16/34651,16 pp. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 21, 2014 from PCT/US2014/033270, 5 pp. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jul. 15, 2016 from PCT/US2016/27658, 37 pp. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 8, 2016 from PCT/US16/37977, 11 pp. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 9, 2016 from PCT/US16/34646, 12 pp. |
International Search Report dated Sep. 26, 2012 from PCT/US2011/029056, 4 pp. |
Iqbal, A. M. et al., “Performance Tradeoffs in Static and Dynamic Load Balancing Strategies,” Instittute for Computer Applications in Science and Engineering, 1986, pp. 1-23. |
Leverenz et al., “Oracle8i Concepts, Partitioned Tables and Indexes,” Chapter 11, pp. 11-12-11/66 (1999). |
Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 21, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,401, 19 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Feb. 1, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, 19 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Feb. 6, 2014 from U.S. Appl. No. 13/933,483, 14 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 12, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/247,364, 12 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated May 19, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/247,364, 24 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated May 31, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,401, 27 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 1, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,461, 21 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 2, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/744,546, 25 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 19, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/726,200, 37 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 21, 2017 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/688,396, 31 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 23, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/616,713, 8 pp. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 10, 2012 from U.S. Appl. No. 13/525,953, 8 pp. |
Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 29, 2012 from U.S. Appl. No. 13/051,750, 8 pp. |
Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 1, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 13/525,953, 10 pp. |
Notice of Allowance dated May 14, 2012 from U.S. Appl. No. 13/051,750, 8 pp. |
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 27, 2016 from U.S. Appl. No. 14/215,372, 12 pp. |
NuoDB at a Glance, retrieved from the Internet at URL: http://doc.nuodb.com/display/doc/NuoDB+at+a+Glance on Feb. 4, 2015, 1 pp. |
Oracle Database Concepts 10g Release 2 (10.2), Oct. 2005, 14 pages. |
Rahimi, S. K. et al., “Distributed Database Management Systems: A Practical Approach,” IEEE Computer Society, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publications (2010), 765 pp. |
Roy, N. et al., “Efficient Autoscaling in the Cloud using Predictive Models for Workload Forecasting,” IEEE 4th International Conference on Cloud Computing, 2011, pp. 500-507. |
Searchcloudapplications.techtarget.com, Autoscaling Definition, Aug. 2012, 1 page. |
Shaull, R. et al., “A Modular and Efficient Past State System for Berkeley DB,” Proceedings of USENIX ATC '14:2014 USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 13 pp. (Jun. 19-20, 2014). |
Shaull, R. et al., “Skippy: a New Snapshot Indexing Method for Time Travel in the Storage Manager,” SIGMOD'08, Jun. 9-12, 2008, 12 pp. |
Shaull, R., “Retro: A Methodology for Retrospection Everywhere,” A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, Aug. 2013, 174 pp. |
Veerman, G et al., “Database Load Balancing, MySQL 5.5 vs PostgreSQL 9.1,” Universiteit van Amsterdam, System & Network Engineering, Apr. 2, 2012, 51 pp. |
Yousif, M. “Shared-Storage Clusters,” Cluster Computing, Baltzer Science Publishers, Bussum, NL, vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 249-257 (1999). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190278757 A1 | Sep 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61789479 | Mar 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14215401 | Mar 2014 | US |
Child | 16129661 | US |