1. CS 414 – Multimedia Systems Design Lecture 26 – Media Server (Part 2)
Klara Nahrstedt
Spring 2011
CS Spring 2011

2. Outline Storage Management Multiple Disks and Multimedia
Multimedia Data Placement Strategies on Disk
Multiple Disks and Multimedia
RAID
Data Striping
Group Creation
Disk Management
Data Interleaving
Disk Scheduling
EDF ; SCAN-EDF
CS Spring 2011

3. Client/Server Video-on-Demand System
CS Spring 2011

4. Video-on-Demand Systems must be designed with goals:
Avoid starvation
Minimize buffer space requirement
Minimize initiation latency (video startup time)
Optimize cost
CS Spring 2011

5. Some Facts on YouTube Video Service (from 2009)
Checked with
Over 1 billion videos per day
Bandwidth accounts for about 51% of expenses -- with a run rate of $1 million per day -- with content licensing accounting for 36%
CS Spring 2011

6. YouTube Video Server (2010)
May 2010, 2 Billion videos served per day
More than 24 hours of video uploaded every minute
Videos usually less than 10 minutes long
CS Spring 2011

7. Media Server Architecture
Delivered data
Incoming request
Network Attachment
Content Directory
Memory Management
File System
Storage management
Disk controller (Disk Management)
Storage device
CS Spring 2011

8. Storage Management
Storage access time to read/write disk block is determined by 3 components
Seek Time
Time required for the movement of read/write head
Rotational Time (Latency Time)
Time during which transfer cannot proceed until the right block or sector rotates under read/write head
Data Transfer Time
Time needed for data to copy from disk into main memory
CS Spring 2011

9. Placement of MM Data Blocks on Single Disk
Continuous Placement
Scattered Placement
Simple to implement, but subject to fragmentation
Avoids fragmentation
Enormous copying overhead during insert/delete to maintain continuity
Avoid copying overhead
When reading file, only one seek required to position the disk head at the start of data
When reading file, seek operation incurs for each block , hence intrafile seek
CS Spring 2011

10. Intra-file Seek Time
Intra-file seek – can be avoided in scattered layout if the amount read from a stream always evenly divides block
Solution: select sufficient large block and read one block in each round
If more than one block is required to prevent starvation prior to next read, deal with intra-file seek
Solution: constrained placement or log-structure placement
CS Spring 2011

11. Scattered Non-continuous Placement
CS Spring 2011

12. Constrained Placement
Approach: separation between successive file blocks is bounded
Bound on separation – not enforced for each pair of successive blocks, but only on average over finite sequence of blocks
Attractive for small block sizes
Implementation – expensive
For constrained latency to yield full benefit, scheduling algorithm must retrieve immediately all blocks for a given stream before switching to another stream
CS Spring 2011

13. Log-Structure Placement
This approach writes modified blocks sequentially in a large contiguous space, instead of requiring seek for each block in stream when writing (recording)
Reduction of disk seeks
Large performance improvements during recording, editing video and audio
Problem: bad performance during playback
Implementation: complex
CS Spring 2011

14. Placement of Multiple MM Files on Single Disk
Popularity concept among multimedia content - very important
Take popularity into account when placing movies on disk
Model of popularity distribution – Zipf’s Law
Movies are kth ranked
if their probability of customer usage is C/k,
C = normalization factor
Condition holds: C/1 + C/2 + … C/N = 1,
N is number of customers
CS Spring 2011

15. Example Assume N = 5 movies
Problem: what is the probability that the next customer picks 3rd ranked movie?
Solution:
Solve C from the equation
C/1 + C/2 + C/3 + C/4 + C/5 = 1
C = 0.437
Probability to pick 3rd ranked movie is C/3 = 0.437/3 =
CS Spring 2011

16. Placement Algorithm for Multiple Files on Single Disk
Organ-Pipe Algorithms (Grossman and Silverman 1973)
1st rank (most popular movie)
2nd ranked movie
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
Middle of disk (in case of traditional disk layout)
Note: In case of ZBR disk layout , place most popular disks at the outer tracks
CS Spring 2011

17. Need for Multiple Disks Solutions for Media Server
Limitation of Single Disk: Disk Throughput
Approach: 1 Maintain multiple copies of the same file on different disks
Very expensive
Approach 2: Scatter multimedia file across multiple disks
CS Spring 2011

18. Approach: Data Striping
RAID (Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks)
Addresses both performance and security
(0-6) RAID levels – different approach at combining performance enhancements with security/fault-tolerance enhancements
Disks spindle synchronously
Operate in lock-step parallel mode
Striping improves BW, but does not improve seek or rotational delay
CS Spring 2011

19. Data Striping – Group Creation
Multiple RAID: Creation of Subgroups of disks into independent logical disk arrays; limits # of disks per file
Declustering: Groups are not made up of complete disks ; # of disks for any stripe is fixed and of same size, but disks on which stripe is located differs
Dynamic Declustering: Non - static strip allocation to disks
CS Spring 2011

20. Storage/Disk Management
Disk access – slow and costly
Reduce disk access
Use block caches (anticipate future reads or writes)
Reduce disk arm motion
Blocks accesses in sequence (continuously) , place together on one cylinder
Interleaved vs non-interleaved storage
CS Spring 2011

21. Data Interleaving Data Interleaving On single disk (consecutive blocks
are placed on
The same cylinder
But in interleaved way
Data Interleaving
On Multiple Disks
(Disks are not
Synchronized)
CS Spring 2011

22. Disk Scheduling Policies
Goal of Scheduling in Traditional Disk Management
Reduce cost of seek time
Achieve high throughput
Provide fair disk access
Goal of Scheduling in Multimedia Disk Management
Meet deadline of all time-critical tasks
Keep necessary buffer requirements low
Serve many streams concurrently
Find balance between time constraints and efficiency
CS Spring 2011

23. Disk Scheduling Framework
Must support multiple QoS levels and requests
Source: Reddy et al, “Disk Scheduling in a Multimedia I/O System”, ACM TOMCCAP 2005
CS Spring 2011

24. EDF (Earliest Deadline First) Disk Scheduling
Each disk block request is tagged with deadline
Very good scheduling policy for periodic requests
Policy:
Schedule disk block request with earliest deadline
Excessive seek time – high overhead
Pure EDF must be adapted or combined with file system strategies
CS Spring 2011

25. EDF Example Note: Consider that block number
Implicitly encapsulates the disk track number
CS Spring 2011

26. Conclusion
Disk Scheduling – important component in the timely delivery of streams
Admission should be done if one cares not to over subscribe
CS Spring 2011