2017
DOI: 10.1109/access.2017.2716441
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ATH: Auto-Tuning HBase’s Configuration via Ensemble Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A straightforward method [12]- [14], [24], [32]- [34] to solve the configuration parameter optimization problem is to construct an offline prediction model first and then apply some search algorithms to online find the optimal configuration based on this prediction model. For instance, Xiong et al [24] utilize an ensemble learning algorithm to build the performance-prediction model and leverage genetic algorithm to search the optimal configuration parameters for HBase. Similarly, for Spark clusters, Yu et al [12] propose a hierarchical modeling method to build the prediction model and then employ genetic algorithm to find the optimal configuration.…”
Section: A Prediction Model-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A straightforward method [12]- [14], [24], [32]- [34] to solve the configuration parameter optimization problem is to construct an offline prediction model first and then apply some search algorithms to online find the optimal configuration based on this prediction model. For instance, Xiong et al [24] utilize an ensemble learning algorithm to build the performance-prediction model and leverage genetic algorithm to search the optimal configuration parameters for HBase. Similarly, for Spark clusters, Yu et al [12] propose a hierarchical modeling method to build the prediction model and then employ genetic algorithm to find the optimal configuration.…”
Section: A Prediction Model-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Black-box objective function. To solve this problem, a straightforward method is to construct a performance prediction model first and then utilize some search based algorithms to explore the optimal configuration [11]- [14], [24]. However, due to the complex implementation of log search engines, it is very difficult if not impossible to figure out the relationship between configuration parameters and performance, and building a useful prediction model usually requires a considerable number of high-quality observations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A straightforward solution to address the configuration parameter autotuning problem is to train an offline prediction model first and then apply some search algorithms to online find the optimal configuration based on this prediction model. For example, Random Forest is utilized to build a performance model for HBase 4 and Hadoop 12 . Similarly, for Spark clusters, Yu et al 13 propose a hierarchical modeling method while Bei et al 20 use the ensemble learning to build the prediction model and then employ genetic algorithm to find the optimal configuration.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, JanusGraph itself mainly focuses on graph serialization and query execution, while providing adapters to integrate third‐party softwares as its functional module for data storage and indices. Unfortunately, although there are already a few significant works toward automatically tuning parameters for different databases such as HBase, 4 Elasticsearch, 5 RocksDB, 6 and MySQL, 7 these solutions cannot be directly applied in the scenarios of modularized GDBs because they solely consider one specific software. What is worse, due to the complicated interactions across different modules, sequentially tuning each software with previous solutions may also fail to efficiently find the optimal configuration for modularized GDBs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation