skip to main content
10.1145/2619239.2626309acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free access

Fastpass: a centralized "zero-queue" datacenter network

Published: 17 August 2014 Publication History

Abstract

An ideal datacenter network should provide several properties, including low median and tail latency, high utilization (throughput), fair allocation of network resources between users or applications, deadline-aware scheduling, and congestion (loss) avoidance. Current datacenter networks inherit the principles that went into the design of the Internet, where packet transmission and path selection decisions are distributed among the endpoints and routers. Instead, we propose that each sender should delegate control---to a centralized arbiter---of when each packet should be transmitted and what path it should follow.
This paper describes Fastpass, a datacenter network architecture built using this principle. Fastpass incorporates two fast algorithms: the first determines the time at which each packet should be transmitted, while the second determines the path to use for that packet. In addition, Fastpass uses an efficient protocol between the endpoints and the arbiter and an arbiter replication strategy for fault-tolerant failover. We deployed and evaluated Fastpass in a portion of Facebook's datacenter network. Our results show that Fastpass achieves high throughput comparable to current networks at a 240x reduction is queue lengths (4.35 Mbytes reducing to 18 Kbytes), achieves much fairer and consistent flow throughputs than the baseline TCP (5200x reduction in the standard deviation of per-flow throughput with five concurrent connections), scalability from 1 to 8 cores in the arbiter implementation with the ability to schedule 2.21 Terabits/s of traffic in software on eight cores, and a 2.5x reduction in the number of TCP retransmissions in a latency-sensitive service at Facebook.

References

[1]
Packet processing on intel architecture. http://www.intel.com/go/dpdk.
[2]
Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Optimization Reference Manual. Number 248966-029. March 2014.
[3]
M. Ajmone Marsan, E. Leonardi, M. Mellia, and F. Neri. On the stability of input-buffer cell switches with speed-up. In INFOCOM, 2000.
[4]
M. Al-Fares, A. Loukissas, and A. Vahdat. A Scalable, Commodity Data Center Network Architecture. In SIGCOMM, 2008.
[5]
M. Al-Fares, S. Radhakrishnan, B. Raghavan, N. Huang, and A. Vahdat. Hedera: Dynamic Flow Scheduling for Data Center Networks. In NSDI, 2010.
[6]
M. Alizadeh, A. Greenberg, D. A. Maltz, J. Padhye, P. Patel, B. Prabhakar, S. Sengupta, M. Sridharan, C. Faster, and D. Maltz. DCTCP: Efficient Packet Transport for the Commoditized Data Center. In SIGCOMM, 2010.
[7]
M. Alizadeh, A. Kabbani, T. Edsall, B. Prabhakar, A. Vahdat, and M. Yasuda. Less is More: Trading a Little Bandwidth for Ultra-Low Latency in the Data Center. In NSDI, 2012.
[8]
M. Alizadeh, S. Yang, S. Katti, N. McKeown, B. Prabhakar, and S. Shenker. Deconstructing Datacenter Packet Transport. In HotNets, 2012.
[9]
T. E. Anderson, S. S. Owicki, J. B. Saxe, and C. P. Thacker. High-Speed Switch Scheduling for Local-Area Networks. ACM Trans. on Comp. Sys., 11(4):319--352, 1993.
[10]
L. A. Barroso, J. Dean, and U. Holzle. Web Search for a Planet: The Google Cluster Architecture. IEEE Micro, 23(2):22--28, 2003.
[11]
M. Chowdhury, M. Zaharia, J. Ma, M. Jordan, and I. Stoica. Managing Data Transfers in Computer Clusters with Orchestra. In SIGCOMM, 2011.
[12]
R. Cole, K. Ost, and S. Schirra. Edge-Coloring Bipartite Multigraphs in O(E log D) Time. Combinatorica, 21(1):5--12, 2001.
[13]
J. Dai and B. Prabhakar. The throughput of data switches with and without speedup. In INFOCOM, 2000.
[14]
J. Duato, S. Yalamanchili, and L. Ni. Interconnection Networks. Morgan Kaufmann, 2003.
[15]
A. Elwalid, C. Jin, S. Low, and I. Widjaja. MATE: MPLS Adaptive Traffic Engineering. In INFOCOM, 2001.
[16]
N. Farrington and A. Andreyev. Facebook's Data Center Network Architecture. In IEEE Optical Interconnects Conf., 2013.
[17]
N. Farrington, G. Porter, Y. Fainman, G. Papen, and A. Vahdat. Hunting Mice with Microsecond Circuit Switches. In HotNets, 2012.
[18]
A. Greenberg, J. R. Hamilton, N. Jain, S. Kandula, C. Kim, P. Lahiri, D. A. Maltz, P. Patel, and S. Sengupta. VL2: A Scalable and Flexible Data Center Network. In SIGCOMM, 2009.
[19]
C.-Y. Hong, S. Kandula, R. Mahajan, M. Zhang, V. Gill, M. Nanduri, and R. Wattenhofer. Achieving High Utilization with Software-Driven WAN. In SIGCOMM, 2013.
[20]
Hong, C. Y. and Caesar, M. and Godfrey, P. Finishing Flows Quickly with Preemptive Scheduling. SIGCOMM, 2012.
[21]
F. Hwang. Control Algorithms for Rearrangeable Clos Networks. IEEE Trans. on Comm., 31(8):952--954, 1983.
[22]
V. Jeyakumar, M. Alizadeh, D. Mazieres, B. Prabhakar, and C. Kim. EyeQ: Practical Network Performance Isolation for the Multi-Tenant Cloud. In HotCloud, 2012.
[23]
A. Kapoor and R. Rizzi. Edge-coloring bipartite graphs. Journal of Algorithms, 34(2):390--396, 2000.
[24]
N. McKeown. The iSLIP Scheduling Algorithm for Input-Queued Switches. IEEE/ACM Trans. on Net., 7(2):188--201, 1999.
[25]
N. McKeown, A. Mekkittikul, V. Anantharam, and J. Walrand. Achieving 100% Throughput in an Input-Queued Switch. IEEE Trans. Comm., 47(8):1260--1267, 1999.
[26]
D. Nagle, D. Serenyi, and A. Matthews. The Panasas ActiveScale Storage Cluster: Delivering Scalable High Bandwidth Storage. In Supercomputing, 2004.
[27]
R. Niranjan Mysore, A. Pamboris, N. Farrington, N. Huang, P. Miri, S. Radhakrishnan, V. Subramanya, and A. Vahdat. PortLand: A Scalable Fault-Tolerant Layer 2 Data Center Network Fabric. In SIGCOMM, 2009.
[28]
R. Nishtala, H. Fugal, S. Grimm, M. Kwiatkowski, H. Lee, H. C. Li, R. McElroy, M. Paleczny, D. Peek, P. Saab, et al. Scaling memcache at facebook. In NSDI, 2013.
[29]
P. Ohly, D. N. Lombard, and K. B. Stanton. Hardware Assisted Precision Time Protocol. Design and Case Study. In LCI Intl. Conf. on High-Perf. Clustered Comp., 2008.
[30]
D. Shah. Maximal matching scheduling is good enough. In GLOBECOM, 2003.
[31]
D. Shah, N. Walton, and Y. Zhong. Optimal Queue-Size Scaling in Switched Networks. In SIGMETRICS, 2012.
[32]
A. Shieh, S. Kandula, A. Greenberg, C. Kim, and B. Saha. Sharing the Data Center Network. In NSDI, 2011.
[33]
R. Takano, T. Kudoh, Y. Kodama, and F. Okazaki. High-Resolution Timer-Based Packet Pacing Mechanism on the Linux Operating System. IEICE Trans. on Comm., 2011.
[34]
Y. Tamir and H.-C. Chi. Symmetric crossbar arbiters for VLSI communication switches. IEEE Trans. Par. Dist. Sys., 4(1):13--27, 1993.
[35]
B. C. Vattikonda, G. Porter, A. Vahdat, and A. C. Snoeren. Practical TDMA for Datacenter Ethernet. In EuroSys, 2012.
[36]
C. Wilson, H. Ballani, T. Karagiannis, and A. Rowtron. Better Never Than Late: Meeting Deadlines in Datacenter Networks. In SIGCOMM, 2011.
[37]
H. Wu, Z. Feng, C. Guo, and Y. Zhang. ICTCP: Incast Congestion Control for TCP in Data Center Networks. In CoNext, 2010.
[38]
X. Wu and X. Yang. DARD: Distributed Adaptive Routing for Datacenter Networks. In ICDCS, 2012.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Fastpass: a centralized "zero-queue" datacenter network

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGCOMM '14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on SIGCOMM
      August 2014
      662 pages
      ISBN:9781450328364
      DOI:10.1145/2619239
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 17 August 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. arbiter
      2. centralized
      3. data plane
      4. datacenter
      5. high throughput
      6. low latency
      7. scheduling
      8. zero-queue

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      SIGCOMM'14
      Sponsor:
      SIGCOMM'14: ACM SIGCOMM 2014 Conference
      August 17 - 22, 2014
      Illinois, Chicago, USA

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGCOMM '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 45 of 242 submissions, 19%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 462 of 3,389 submissions, 14%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)530
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)73
      Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Login options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media