AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.3 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Open Access

Coarse-Grained Cloud Synchronization Mechanism Design May Lead to Severe Traffic Overuse

Department of Computer Science and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota — Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
Show Author Information

Abstract

In recent years, cloud sync(hronization) services such as GoogleDrive and Dropbox have provided Internet users with convenient and reliable data storing/sharing functionality. The cloud synchronization mechanism (in particular, how to deliver the user-side data updates to the cloud) plays a critical role in cloud sync services because it greatly affects the cloud operation cost (in terms of sync traffic) and user experience (in terms of sync delay). By comprehensively measuring tens of popular cloud sync services, we find that their cloud sync mechanisms differ greatly in sync performance and design granularity. Quite surprisingly, some very popular services (like GoogleDrive and 115 SyncDisk) utilize a quite coarse-grained cloud sync mechanism that may lead to severe traffic overuse. For example, updating 1-MB data may sometimes result in 260-MB sync traffic. In this paper, we conduct a comparative study of various cloud sync mechanisms by analyzing their respective pros and cons under different situations, unravel the pathological processes for their traffic overuse problems, and finally provide insights/solutions for better choosing/designing a cloud sync service.

References

[1]
115 SyncDisk, http://pc.115.com/box, 2012.
[2]
Box.com, http://box.com, 2012.
[3]
Baidu CloudDisk, http://pan.baidu.com, 2012.
[4]
Kanbox, http://www.kanbox.com, 2012.
[5]
Kingsoft Kuaipan, http://www.kuaipan.cn, 2012.
[6]
VDisk, http://vdisk.me, 2012.
[7]
IDriveSync, http://www.idrivesync.com, 2012.
[8]
360 CloudDisk, http://yunpan.360.cn, 2012.
[9]
Everbox, http://www.everbox.com, 2012.
[10]
Youdao Cloud Note, http://note.youdao.com, 2012.
[11]
CloudMe, http://www.cloudme.com, 2012.
[12]
QQ Cloud Disk, http://disk.qq.com, 2012.
[13]
Huawei DBank, http://www.dbank.com, 2012.
[14]
Dropbox is now the data fabric tying together devices for 100M registered users who save 1B files a day, http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/13/dropbox-100-million, 2012.
[15]
The number of 115-NetDisk users has exceeded 30M, http://www.donews.com/net/201203/1139233.shtm, 2012.
[16]
GoogleDocs, http://docs.google.com, 2012.
[17]
E. Zohar, I. Cidon, and O. Mokryn, The power of prediction: Cloud bandwidth and cost reduction, in Proc. 2011 Annual Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication (SIGCOMM), Toronto, Canada, 2011.
[18]
A. Tridgell and P. Mackerras, The rsync algorithm, Computer Science Technical Report Series TR-CS-96-05, Australian National University, Australia, 1996.
[19]
[20]
Binary diff wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff, 2012.
[21]
DropboxTeams, http://www.dropbox.com/teams, 2012.
[22]
[23]
[24]
Y. He and Y. Liu, VOVO: VCR-oriented video-on-demand in large-scale peer-to-peer networks, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 528-539, 2009.
[25]
X. Liao, H. Jin, Y. Liu, and L. Ni, Scalable live streaming service based on inter-overlay optimization, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), vol. 18, no. 12, pp. 1663-1674, 2007.
[26]
W. Hu, T. Yang, and J. N. Matthews, The good, the bad and the ugly of consumer cloud storage, ACM SIGOPS Operating System Review, vol. 44, no.3, pp. 110-115, 2010.
[27]
I. Drago, M. Mellia, M. Munaf, A. Sperotto, R. Sadre, and A. Pras, Inside dropbox: Understanding personal cloud storage services, in Proc. 12th ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), Boston, MA, USA, 2012.
[28]
H. Wang, R. Shea, F. Wang, and J. Liu, On the impact of virtualization on dropbox-like cloud file storage/synchronization services, in Proc. 20th IEEE/ACM Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS), Coimbra, Portugal, 2012.
[29]
A. Li, X. Yang, S. Kandula, and M. Zhang, CloudCmp: Comparing public cloud providers, in Proc. 10th ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), Melbourne, Australia, 2010.
[30]
A. Bergen, Y. Coady, and R. McGeer, Client bandwidth: The forgotten metric of online storage providers, in Proc. IEEE Pacific Rim Conference on Communications, Computers and Signal Processing (PacRim), Victoria, B.C., Canada, 2011.
[31]
M. Vrable, S. Savage, and G. Voelker, Cumulus: Filesystem backup to the cloud, in Proc. 7th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2009.
[32]
M. Vrable, S. Savage, and G. Voelker, BlueSky: A cloud-backed file system for the enterprise, in Proc. 10th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST), San Jose, CA, USA, 2012.
[33]
B. Calder, J. Wang, A. Ogus, N. Nilakantan, A. Skjolsvold, S. Mckelvie, Y. Xu, S. Srivastav, J. Wu, H. Simitci, J. Haridas, C. Uddaraju, H. Khatri, A. Edwards, V. Bedekar, S. Mainali, R. Abbasi, A. Agarwal, M. Fahim ul Haq, M. Ikram ul Haq, D. Bhardwaj, S. Dayanand, A. Adusumilli, M. McNett, S. Sankaran, K. Manivannan, and L. Rigas, Windows azure storage: A highly available cloud storage service with strong consistency, in Proc. 23rd ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP), Cascais, Portugal, 2011.
[34]
D. Harnik, B. Pinkas, and A. Shulman-Peleg, Side channels in cloud services: Deduplication in cloud storage, IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 40-47, 2010.
[35]
S. Halevi, D. Harnik, B. Pinkas, and A. Shulman-Peleg, Proofs of ownership in remote storage systems, in Proc. 18th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), Chicago, IL, USA, 2011.
[36]
M. Mulazzani, S. Schrittwieser, M. Leithner, M. Huber, and E. Weippl, Dark clouds on the horizon: Using cloud storage as attack vector and online slack space, in Proc. 20th USENIX Security Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2011.
Tsinghua Science and Technology
Pages 286-297
Cite this article:
Li Z, Zhang Z-L, Dai Y. Coarse-Grained Cloud Synchronization Mechanism Design May Lead to Severe Traffic Overuse. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 2013, 18(3): 286-297. https://doi.org/10.1109/TST.2013.6522587

461

Views

11

Downloads

20

Crossref

N/A

Web of Science

21

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics

Received: 25 February 2013
Accepted: 01 March 2013
Published: 03 June 2013
© The author(s) 2013
Return