Skip to main content
Log in

Mapping granularity and performance tradeoffs for solid state drive

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Evolving NAND flash-based Solid State Drives (SSDs) tend to get denser and faster, and these are quickly becoming popular in a wide variety of applications. Flash-based SSDs are composed of dozens of non-volatile flash memories with multi-channel and multi-way architecture. Due to the physical limits, Flash Translation Layer (FTL) is employed for the management between host requests and flash requests operations. Among many roles of FTL, mapping management is main key of SSD performance. This paper presents tradeoffs of page-level FTL mapping granularity for appropriate target performance of SSDs. The mapping management is designed with regard to the SSD architecture such as multi-channel and multi-way. Three mapping tradeoff issues are addressed: static and dynamic mapping, mapping unit size, and caching issue. The simulation results shows that various page-level FTL mapping granularities have a decisive effect on SSD design; not only the performance issue, but also resource management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wu M, Zwaenepoel W (1994) eNVY: a non-volatile, main memory storage system. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on architectural support for programming language and operating systems, pp 86–97

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Douglis F, Caceres R, Kaashoek F, Li K, Marsh B, Tauber JA (1994) Storage alternatives for mobile computers. In: Proc of the 1st symposium on operating systems design and implementation (OSDI), pp 25–37

    Google Scholar 

  3. Intel Corporation. Understanding the flash translation layer (FTL) specification. http://developer.intel.com/

  4. STEC Incorporated. ZeusIOPS, Solid state drive. http://www.stec-inc.com/downloads/flash-datasheets/iopsdatasheet.pdf

  5. Samsung Electronics co (2011). MZ-5PAXXX SATA SSD product data sheet. June http://www.samsung.com/sec/consumer/it/harddiskdrives/ssd/index.idx?pagetype=subtype

  6. Intel Corporation. Intel® Solid-State drive. http://www.intel.com/design/flash/nand/index.htm

  7. Ban A (1995) Flash file system. United States Patent, no 5,404,485

  8. Kim J, Kim JM, Noh SH, Min SL, Cho Y (2002) A space-efficient flash translation layer for CompactFlash systems. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 48(2):366–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kang JU, Jo H, Kim JS, Lee J (2006) A superblock-based flash translation layer for NAND flash memory. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM & IEEE international conference on embedded software

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lee SW, Choi WK, Park DJ (2006) FAST: An efficient flash translation layer for flash memory. In: Embedded and ubiquitous workshops, pp 879–887

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gupta A, Kim Y, Urgaonkar B (2009) DFTL: a flash translation layer employing demand-based selective caching of page-level address mappings. In: Proceeding of the 14th international conference on architectural support for programming languages and operating systems

    Google Scholar 

  12. Shim H, Jung D, Kim J, Kim J-S, Maeng S (2010) Co-optimizatino of buffer layer and FTL in high-performance flash-based storage systems. Des Autom Embed Syst 14(4):415–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ma D, Feng J, Li G (2011) LazyFTL: a page-level flash translation layer optimized for NAND flash memory. In: Proceeding of the ACM SIGMOD

    Google Scholar 

  14. Samsung electronics co (2009) K9XXG08XXM flash memory specification. http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/

  15. Agrawal N, Prabhakaran V, Wobber T, Davis JD, Manasse M, Panigrahy R (2008) Design tradeoffs for SSD performance. In: USENIX 2008 annual technical conference, Boston, Massachusetts, June 22–27, pp 57–70

    Google Scholar 

  16. Park S-H, Ha S-H, Bang K, Chung E-Y (2009) Design and analysis of flash translation layers for multi-channel NAND flash-based storage devices. IEEE Trans Consumer Electron 55(3)

  17. Park C, Talawar P, Won D, Jung M, Im J, Kim S, Choi Y (2006) A high performance controller for NAND flash-based solid state disk (NSSD). In: 21st IEEE non-volatile semiconductor memory workshop

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kang J-U, Kim J-S, Park C, Park H, Lee J (2007) A multi-channel architecture for high-performance NAND flash-based storage system. J Syst Archit 53(9)

  19. Park S-y, Seo E, Shin J-Y, Maeng S, Lee J (2010) Exploiting internal parallelism of flash-based SSDs. IEEE Comput Archit Lett 9(1):9–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Narayanan D, Thereska E, Donnely A, Elnikety S, Rowstron A (2009) Migrating server storage to SSDs: analysis of tradeoffs. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM European conference on computer systems

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kim Y, Tauras B, Gupta A, Nistor DM, Urgaonkar B (2009) FlashSim: a simulator for NAND flash-based solid-state drives. In: First international conference on advances in system simulation

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the NRF (National Research Foundation of Korea) grant funded by the MEST (Ministry of Education Science and Technology) (No. 2011-0026555).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung-Ho Lim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, Y., Barolli, L. & Lim, SH. Mapping granularity and performance tradeoffs for solid state drive. J Supercomput 65, 507–523 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-012-0798-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-012-0798-2

Keywords

Navigation