Asynchronous Cloud Storage Frontend Reduces State Overhead

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Cloud storage systems face inefficiencies in managing large-scale archival data storage due to state data overhead from time-constrained interfaces, which can lead to increased costs and latency in data access.

Innovation Solution

A self-organizing storage system with an asynchronous storage interface that allows frontend servers to organize requests by type and backend nodes to select and fulfill requests based on dynamic characteristics, reducing state data overhead and optimizing data access across various storage media types.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Speed

If a time-constrained request-response interface is used, then data access speed is improved, but state data overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata access speedVSAvoidstate data overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the timing constraint requirement from the interface protocol and moves it to the application layer. The asynchronous interface removes time constraints from the core communication protocol, allowing requests to be processed without strict timing requirements. This eliminates the need for complex state data to track timing information, while applications can still enforce their own timing requirements if needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the timing characteristics of data access based on the specific needs of different applications. Rather than enforcing a uniform time constraint on all operations, the system allows each application to specify its own timing requirements when needed, while defaulting to asynchronous processing for operations where timing is not critical. This dynamic approach reduces overall state data overhead while maintaining speed where required.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Speed

If costly storage components are used, then data access performance is improved, but operational costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata access performanceVSAvoidoperational costs
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies different quality levels of storage components to different data and access patterns. Frequently accessed data can be stored in faster, more expensive media, while archival data with less demanding access patterns can use slower, cheaper storage. The asynchronous interface enables this differentiation by allowing applications to specify their access timing requirements, which then determines the appropriate storage medium to use.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the timing parameter of data access from a fixed time constraint to a flexible asynchronous model. This parameter change allows the system to optimize storage component selection based on actual access patterns rather than assuming all data requires fast access. Applications can indicate when timing is critical, and the system can use faster storage only for those specific cases, reducing overall operational costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Device complexity

If an asynchronous interface is used, then state data overhead is reduced, but data access latency increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestate data overheadVSAvoiddata access latency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a partial synchronous model where timing constraints are applied only when necessary rather than universally. For applications that require timely responses, the system can enforce synchronous behavior with timeout mechanisms. For applications that can tolerate latency, fully asynchronous processing is used. This partial application of timing constraints reduces state data overhead while maintaining acceptable latency for time-sensitive operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Loss of time

If frontend servers maintain state data, then response time is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresponse timeVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an event-driven intermediary layer between the asynchronous interface and the backend processing. Events are queued and processed in the background, allowing the frontend to respond immediately with an event confirmation without maintaining state data about the actual data access outcome. This intermediary event mechanism reduces response time for interface operations while avoiding the complexity of maintaining detailed state data about ongoing operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP3449352B1Self-organizing storage system for asynchronous storage service
Publication Date: 2020.07.22 NETAPP INC
  • EP3449352B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3449352B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3449352B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

An archival cloud storage service can be created with cost efficient components for large scale data storage and can efficiently use these components. A frontend of the cloud storage service presents an asynchronous storage interface to consuming devices of the cloud storage service. Providing an asynchronous storage service interface avoids at least some of the state data overhead that accompanies a time constrained interface (e.g., a request-response based interface with timeouts in seconds). Backend nodes of the cloud storage service periodically query the frontend servers to select requests that the backend nodes can fulfill. Each backend node selects requests based on backend characteristics information, likely dynamic characteristics, of the backend node. Thus, the storage system underlying the cloud storage service can be considered a self-organizing storage system.