skip to main content
10.1145/1146847.1146903acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesinfoscaleConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Storage load balancing via local interactions among peers in unstructured P2P networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:30 May 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

The present paper introduces a replication method that is meant to balance the storage load of peers in unstructured peer-to-peer (P2P) networks for file sharing and to provide good search performance. According to the random walk theory on an arbitrary network, the frequency of arrival of a random walker to a peer is proportional to the degree of the peers. Therefore, to limit the increase in the number of hops required to find a requested file, it is better to make as many files as possible in peers of high degree when using random-walk-based query forwarding methods. However, this causes a load bias to peers of high degree. That is, there is a trade-off between storage load balancing and search performance. The replication method presented herein replicates a requested file in a peer of low load adjacent to a peer of interest on the present search path by using dynamically varying values that represent the state of the load of peers. Therefore, it is expected that local storage load balancing will be achieved. Furthermore, since the proposed method causes peers adjacent to peers of high degree to hold several files, it is also expected that good search performance will be obtained. In addition, a replication method that makes a replica of a requested file in a peer on the present search path with probability inversely proportional to the degree of the peer is prepared as a method for comparison. The probability is, in contrast to the proposed method, statically determined prior to the start of the search according to the theory to ensure good load balancing. The experimental results show that both the proposed method and the method for comparison achieve global load balancing, although they have totally different strategies in terms of storage load balancing. It is, however, shown that only the proposed method does not require appropriate adjustment of parameter values to a given network topology prior to the start of the search in order to achieve good search performance. This is a significant advantage over the method for comparison.

References

  1. E. K. Lua, J. Crowcroft, M. Pias, R. Sharma, and S. Lim, "A survey and comparison of peer-to-peer overlay network schemes," IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 72--93, 2005.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. H. Yamamoto, D. Maruta, and Y. Oie, "Replication method for load balancing on distributed storages in P2P networks," IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems - Special Section on New Technologies and their Applications of the Internet III, January 2006.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. R. Motwani and P. Raghavan, Randomized Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. E. Cohen and S. Shenker, "Replication strategies in unstructured peer-to-peer networks," in Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2002, 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Q. Lv, P. Cao, E. Cohen, and S. Li, K. Shenker, "Search and replication in unstructured peer-to-peer networks," in Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Supercomputing, 2002, pp. 84--95.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Rao, K. Lakshminarayanan, S. Surana, R. Karp, and I. Stoica, "Load balancing in structured P2P systems," in Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS '03), 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. D. R. Karger and M. Ruhl, "Simple efficient load balancing algorithms for peer-to-peer systems," in Proceedings of the sixteenth annual ACM symposium on Parallelism in algorithms and architectures, 2004.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. I. Clarke, O. Snadberg, B. Wiley, and T. W. Hong, "Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system," in Proceedings of Workshop on Design Issue in Anonymity and Unobservability, 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. A. Rowstron and P. Druschel, "Pastry: Scalable decentralized object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems," in Proceedings of IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware), 2001, pp. 329--350.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Ata, Y. Gotoh, and M. Murata, "Replication strategies in peer-to-peer services over power-law overlay networks," in Proceedings of The 7th Asia-Pacific Network Operations and Management Symposium (APNOMS 2003), 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. G. Cybenko, "Dynamic load balancing for distributed memory multiprocessors," Parallel and Distributed Computing, Vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 279--301, 1989.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Boillat, "Load balancing and poisson equation in a graph," Concurrency Practice and Experience, Vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 289--313, 1990.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. A. Corradi, L. Leonardi, and F. Zambonelli, "Diffusive load balancing policies for dynamic applications," IEEE Concurrency, Vol. 7, no. 1, 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Bu and D. Towsley, "On distinguishing between internet power law topology generators," in Proceedings of IEEE Infocom 2002, 2003, pp. 638--647.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A.-L. Barabasi and R. Albert, "Emergence of scaling in random networks," SCIENCE, Vol. 286, pp. 509--512, 1999.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. R. Albert and A.-L. Barabasi, "Topology of evolving networks: Local events and universality," Physical Review Letters, pp. 5234--5237, 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. L. A. Adamic, R. M. Lukose, A. R. Puniyani, and B. A. Huberman, "Search in power-law networks," Physical Review E 64, 046135, 2001.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. M. Ripeanu, A. Iamnitchi, and I. Foster, "Mapping the gnutella network," IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 50--57, 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Storage load balancing via local interactions among peers in unstructured P2P networks

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            InfoScale '06: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Scalable information systems
            May 2006
            512 pages
            ISBN:1595934286
            DOI:10.1145/1146847

            Copyright © 2006 ACM

            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 ACM 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]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 30 May 2006

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            InfoScale '06 Paper Acceptance Rate33of91submissions,36%Overall Acceptance Rate33of91submissions,36%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader