• Home
  • About Me
  • Tablet Stand
  • Subscribe

Dave Graham’s Weblog

Micro-burst: Master Node Topology

by dave on August 12, 2009



Going along with the Cloud theme that I’m fortunate enough to be a part of, I’ve decided to use the “micro-burst” moniker to section off quick n’ dirty posts on a variety of cloud subjects that I don’t have time to dive into fully.  With that in mind, let’s get on with the show.

Master Node Topologies: Google File Systems

Today’s topic is based on the link here from The Register.  What I find fascinating is that Google has been able to manage their growth using a single master node topology for their filesystem.  To the article’s point, a single master node offers a single point of failure especially from a chunklet processing and scheduling standpoint.  Bandwidth would also be constrained seeing as how meta would have to pass through and be processed by a single  entity.  Since I’m unaware of the underlying hardware and scalability of their processing complex for this (though I’ve read through the articles that have attempted to explain it), these processing issues could reasonably be remedied by more powerful system hardware and/or software refinement.

It’s exciting to see that Google has thus far been able to move their GFS platform forward and embrace a horizontal scale-out mechanism for the revision 2 product.  Good luck to them as they continue to move their company forward!

Why a Master Node Plurality Makes Sense

When designing for any sort of scale-out filesystem (or what I’d consider a horizontally scalable file system), it makes sense to include the ability to scale the master node (or scheduler node) complexes.  The obvious reason behind this is filesystem growth, to be sure, but as metadata processing becomes increasingly complex (i.e. more FS abilities driven by custom meta), the need to ingest data at the same or higher rate as originally specified becomes critical.  By having a more robust front-end driven by more powerful master nodes with synchronous metadata indexes (or siloed masters with individual meta dbs), you can maintain latency (time to disk or time to commit) SLAs without completely crushing your cloud’s ability to service I/O operations in general. (see image below for conceptual diagram)

Multiple Masternode File system

Multiple Masternode File system

Hopefully my musings on this subject make sense.  Let me know if you have any questions!

cheers,

Dave

Related articles by Zemanta
  • NSA To Use Cloud Model For Intelligence Analysis (news.slashdot.org)
  • App Server Cloud Architectures (caucho.com)
  • Sparse Data Locality Invention from the Google (arnoldit.com)
  • On Google File System (mt-soft.com.ar)
  • Google File System II: Dawn of the Multiplying Master Nodes (theregister.co.uk)
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Share this:

  • Email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • Google +1
  • Pinterest
Share

Tagged as: Articles, Companies, File system, google, Google File Systems Today, Master Data Management, Metadata, Micro-Burst, Register, Scalability

Logging In...

Comments are closed.

  • 2 Replies
  • 0 Comments
  • 0 Tweets
  • 0 Facebook
  • 2 Pingbacks
Last reply was January 15, 2010
  1. Micro-burst: Metadata — Dave Graham's Weblog
    View August 20, 2009

    [...] meta database(s) to equalize performance across nodes (as noted in my master/slave node topology here).  Additionally, a protection mechanism for these databases could have performance implications [...]

  2. Video: Cloud and GPUs — Flickerdown Dave Graham's Weblog
    View January 15, 2010

    [...] Micro-burst: Master Node Topology (flickerdown.com) [...]

  • Disclaimer

    The opinions expressed here are my personal opinions and do not represent the views held by my employer, Juniper Networks.
  • Speeds ‘n Feeds

    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

    Xobni outlook add-in for your inbox

    Green Web Hosting! This site hosted by DreamHost.
  • Tags

    Advanced Micro Devices AMD Atmos Business Celerra Centera Cisco Cisco Systems clariion Cloud Cloud computing Components Computer data storage Dell EMC EMC Atmos EMC Corporation Ethernet FCoE Fibre Fibre Channel Fibre Channel over Ethernet FSS Hardware IBM Infiniband Intel iSCSI Microsoft Multi-core NetApp Operating system Opteron perspective Qlogic RAID SAS SATA SMB SSD storage Storage area network Symmetrix twitter VMWare
  • Twitter Test Widget

  • Blogroll

    • Andrew Cohen
    • Ask the Open Systems Guy
    • Blog Stu
    • Chuck’s Blog
    • Confessions of an eBiz Junkie
    • Grumpy Storage
    • Info Exponential
    • Info Muse
    • Information Playground
    • Joe Kelly’s Blog
    • Mark’s Blog
    • Polly Pearson’s Blog
    • Power Window’s Blog
    • Storage Blog
    • Storage Rap
    • Storagebod
    • Storagezilla
    • Superawesomesauce
    • The Backup Blog
    • The Storage Alchemist
    • The Storage Anarchist
    • Thinking Out Cloud
    • Virtual Geek
    • Yellow Bricks
  • Archives

    • November 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • February 2012
    • December 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • May 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • September 2007
    • August 2007

Get smart with the Thesis WordPress Theme from DIYthemes.

Logo design by Redhead Design.


WordPress Admin

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.