Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

estimate hot/warm/cold data access ratios within archive or even per dandiset #162

Open
yarikoptic opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member

cold - over a week I guess

@waxlamp
Copy link
Member

waxlamp commented Jun 15, 2023

Could you say more about this, @yarikoptic? Perhaps give some examples of what you expect to see?

@waxlamp waxlamp self-assigned this Jun 15, 2023
@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member Author

I believe this request was in relationship to questionnairs from protocollabs while investigating data access schemes if data gets deposited to IPFS. It relates to typical scenarios on how people access data -- are the same files get re-accessed immediately, or typically just once and then not again for a while. I do not truly remember hot/warm separation idea here, but we can make it following that "Cold" - prior to first access in current period (day? week?) it was not accessed for a week. "Warm" - was accessed within last day, "Hot" - was accessed within last hour.

So e.g. for overall transfer of 1TB of data, we could have Cold: 900G, Warm: 90G, Hot: 10G thus showing that primarily data is accessed once and only small portion (1%) could benefit from some kind of faster caching layer to speed up access. But we could also see Cold: 10G, Warm: 90G, Hot: 900G suggesting that having some cache over overall slow storage backend could be of great benefit since most of the time data is immediately reaccessed.

Makes sense?

@yarikoptic yarikoptic transferred this issue from dandi/dandi-archive Sep 21, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants