skip to main content
research-article

FSIMR: File-system-aware Data Management for Interlaced Magnetic Recording

Published:09 September 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Interlaced Magnetic Recording (IMR) is an emerging recording technology for hard-disk drives (HDDs) that provides larger storage capacity at a lower cost. By partially overlapping (interlacing) each bottom track with two adjacent top tracks, IMR-based HDDs successfully increase the data density while incurring some hardware write constraints. To update each bottom track, the data on two adjacent top tracks must be read and rewritten to avoid losing their valid data, resulting in additional overhead for performing read-modify-write (RMW) operations. Therefore, researchers have proposed various data management schemes to mitigate such overhead in recent years, aiming at improving the write performance. However, these designs have not taken into account the data characteristics of the file system, which is a crucial layer of operating systems for storing/retrieving data into/from HDDs. Consequently, the write performance improvement is limited due to the unawareness of spatial locality and hotness of data. This paper proposes a file-system-aware data management scheme called FSIMR to improve system write performance. Noticing that data of the same directory may have higher spatial locality and are mostly updated at the same time, FSIMR logically partitions the IMR-based HDD into fixed-sized zones; data belonging to the same directory will be arranged to one zone to reduce the time of seeking to-be-updated data (seek time). Furthermore, cold data within a zone are arranged to bottom tracks and updated in an out-of-place manner to eliminate RMW operations. Our experimental results show that the proposed FSIMR could reduce the seek time by up to 14% without introducing additional RMW operations, compared to existing designs.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Aghayev Abutalib, Theodore Y., Gibson Garth, and Desnoyers Peter. 2017. Evolving ext4 for shingled disks. In FAST. 105120.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [2] Amer Ahmed, Holliday JoAnne, Long Darrell D. E., Miller Ethan L., Pâris Jehan-François, and Schwarz Thomas. 2011. Data management and layout for shingled magnetic recording. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 47, 10 (2011), 36913697.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. [3] Arpaci-Dusseau Remzi H. and Arpaci-Dusseau Andrea C.. 2018. Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces (1.00 ed.). Arpaci-Dusseau Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [4] Campello Daniel, Lopez Hector, Useche Luis, Koller Ricardo, and Rangaswami Raju. 2014. FIU filesystem SysCall Traces (SNIA IOTTA trace set 5198). In SNIA IOTTA Trace Repository, Kuenning Geoff (Ed.). Storage Networking Industry Association. http://iotta.snia.org/traces/system-call?only=5198Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Cao Mingming, Bhattacharya Suparna, and Ts’o Ted. 2007. Ext4: The next generation of Ext2/3 filesystem. In LSF.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] Carrier Brian. 2005. File System Forensic Analysis. Addison-Wesley Professional.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. [7] Fairbanks Kevin D.. 2012. An analysis of Ext4 for digital forensics. Digital Investigation 9 (2012), S118–S130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Fitzpatrick Michael E.. 2011. 4K sector disk drives: Transitioning to the future with advanced format technologies. Toshiba. http://storage.toshiba.com/docs/services-support-documents/toshiba_4kwhitepaper.pdf. (vid.pág.349) (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. [9] Gao Kaizhong, Zhu Wenzhong, and Gage Edward. 2016. Write management for interlaced magnetic recording devices. (Nov. 292016). US Patent 9,508,362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [10] Gao Kaizhong, Zhu Wenzhong, and Gage Edward. 2017. Interlaced magnetic recording. (Aug. 82017). US Patent 9,728,206.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [11] Granz Steven, Jury Jason, Rea Chris, Ju Ganping, Thiele Jan-Ulrich, Rausch Tim, and Gage Edward C.. 2018. Areal density comparison between conventional, shingled, and interlaced heat-assisted magnetic recording with multiple sensor magnetic recording. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 55, 3 (2018), 13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] Hajkazemi Mohammad Hossein, Kulkarni Ajay Narayan, Desnoyers Peter, and Feldman Timothy R.. 2019. Track-based translation layers for interlaced magnetic recording. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference. 821832.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. [13] Hwang Euiseok, Park Jongseung, Rauschmayer Richard, and Wilson Bruce. 2016. Interlaced magnetic recording. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 53, 4 (2016), 17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Jeong Sooman, Lee Kisung, Lee Seongjin, Son Seoungbum, and Won Youjip. 2013. I/O stack optimization for smartphones. In 2013 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIXATC 13). 309320.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. [15] Kadekodi Saurabh, Pimpale Swapnil, and Gibson Garth A.. 2015. Caveat-scriptor: Write anywhere shingled disks. In 7th USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Storage and File Systems (HotStorage 15).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Liang Yuhong, Yang Tsun-Yu, and Yang Ming-Chang. 2021. KVIMR: Key-value store aware data management middleware for interlaced magnetic recording based hard disk drive. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference. 657671.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. [17] Liang Yu-Pei, Chen Shuo-Han, Chang Yuan-Hao, Lin Yong-Chin, Wei Hsin-Wen, and Shih Wei-Kuan. 2019. Mitigating write amplification issue of SMR drives via the design of sequential-write-constrained cache. Journal of Systems Architecture 99 (2019), 101634. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. [18] Mathur Avantika, Cao Mingming, Bhattacharya Suparna, Dilger Andreas, Tomas Alex, and Vivier Laurent. 2007. The new ext4 filesystem: Current status and future plans. In Proceedings of the Linux Symposium, Vol. 2. Citeseer, 2133.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. [19] Narayanan Dushyanth, Donnelly Austin, and Rowstron Antony. 2007. MSR cambridge traces (SNIA IOTTA trace 386). In SNIA IOTTA Trace Repository, Kuenning Geoff (Ed.). Storage Networking Industry Association. http://iotta.snia.org/traces/block-io/388?only=386Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Ruemmler Chris and Wilkes John. 1994. An introduction to disk drive modeling. Computer 27, 3 (1994), 1728.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Wiki Ext. 2013. Ext4 Disk Layout. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. [22] Wu Fenggang, Li Bingzhe, Zhang Baoquan, Cao Zhichao, Diehl Jim, Wen Hao, and Du David H. C.. 2020. TrackLace: Data management for interlaced magnetic recording. IEEE Trans. Comput. 70, 3 (2020), 347358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. [23] Xia Peng, Feng Dan, Jiang Hong, Tian Lei, and Wang Fang. 2008. Farmer: A novel approach to file access correlation mining and evaluation reference model for optimizing peta-scale file system performance. In Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing. 185196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. [24] Zeng Zhimin, Chen Xinyu, Yang Laurence T., and Cui Jinhua. 2022. IMRSim: A disk simulator for interlaced magnetic recording technology. In Network and Parallel Computing: 19th IFIP WG 10.3 International Conference, NPC 2022, Jinan, China, September 24–25, 2022, Proceedings. Springer, 267273.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. FSIMR: File-system-aware Data Management for Interlaced Magnetic Recording

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems
          ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems  Volume 22, Issue 5s
          Special Issue ESWEEK 2023
          October 2023
          1394 pages
          ISSN:1539-9087
          EISSN:1558-3465
          DOI:10.1145/3614235
          • Editor:
          • Tulika Mitra
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 9 September 2023
          • Accepted: 1 July 2023
          • Revised: 2 June 2023
          • Received: 16 March 2023
          Published in tecs Volume 22, Issue 5s

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)218
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)45

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text