skip to main content
10.1145/3318464.3386136acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Timon: A Timestamped Event Database for Efficient Telemetry Data Processing and Analytics

Published:31 May 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

With the increasing demand for real-time system monitoring and tracking in various contexts, the amount of time-stamped event data grows at an astonishing rate. Analytics on time-stamped events must be real time and the aggregated results need to be accurate even when data arrives out of order. Unfortunately, frequent occurrences of out-of-order data will significantly slow down the processing, and cause a large delay in the query response. Timon is a timestamped event database that aims to support aggregations and handle late arrivals both correctly (i.e., upholding the exactly-once semantics) and efficiently. Our insight is that a broad range of applications can be implemented with data structures and corresponding operators that satisfy associative and commutative properties. Records arriving after the low watermark are appended to Timon directly, allowing aggregations to be performed lazily. To improve query efficiency, Timon maintains a TS-LSM-Tree, which keeps the most recent data in memory and contains a time-partitioning tree on disk for high-volume data accumulated over long time span. Besides, Timon supports materialized aggregation views and correlation analysis across multiple streams. Timon has been successfully deployed at Alibaba Cloud and is a critical building block for Alibaba cloud's continuous monitoring and anomaly analysis infrastructure.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3318464.3386136.mp4

mp4

110.6 MB

References

  1. T. Akidau, A. Balikov, K. Bekiroglu, S. Chernyak, J. Haberman, R. Lax, S. McVeety, D. Mills, P. Nordstrom, and S. Whittle. Millwheel: Fault-tolerant stream processing at internet scale. PVLDB, 6(11):1033--1044, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. T. Akidau, R. Bradshaw, C. Chambers, S. Chernyak, R. Ferná ndez-Moctezuma, R. Lax, S. McVeety, D. Mills, F. Perry, E. Schmidt, and S. Whittle. The dataflow model: A practical approach to balancing correctness, latency, and cost in massive-scale, unbounded, out-of-order data processing. PVLDB, 8(12):1792--1803, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. AlibabaCloud. Loghub. https://www.alibabacloud.com/product/log-service.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. AlibabaCloud. Polardb. https://www.alibabacloud.com/products/apsaradb-for-polardb.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. AlibabaCloud. Rds. https://www.alibabacloud.com/product/apsaradb-for-rds-mysql.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. M. P. Andersen and D. E. Culler. Btrdb: Optimizing storage system design for timeseries processing. In FAST, pages 39--52, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Apache. Cassandra. http://cassandra.apache.org/, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Apache. Hbase. https://hbase.apache.org/, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Apache. Kafka. https://kafka.apache.org/, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Apache. Opentsdb. http://opentsdb.net/, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Apache. Storm. https://storm.apache.org/, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. AWS. Kinesis. https://aws.amazon.com/kinesis/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. O. Boykin, S. Ritchie, I. O'Connell, and J. Lin. Summingbird: A framework for integrating batch and online mapreduce computations. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 7(13):1441--1451, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. W. Cao, Y. Gao, B. Lin, X. Feng, Y. Xie, X. Lou, and P. Wang. Tcprt: Instrument and diagnostic analysis system for service quality of cloud databases at massive scale in real-time. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD '18, pages 615--627, New York, NY, USA, 2018. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. W. Cao, Y. Liu, Z. Cheng, N. Zheng, W. Li, W. Wu, L. Ouyang, P. Wang, Y. Wang, R. Kuan, et al. $$POLARDB$$ meets computational storage: Efficiently support analytical workloads in cloud-native relational database. In 18th $$USENIX$$ Conference on File and Storage Technologies ($$FAST$$ 20), pages 29--41, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. W. Cao, Z. Liu, P. Wang, S. Chen, C. Zhu, S. Zheng, Y. Wang, and G. Ma. Polarfs: an ultra-low latency and failure resilient distributed file system for shared storage cloud database. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 11(12):1849--1862, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. Dean and S. Ghemawat. Mapreduce: simplified data processing on large clusters. Communications of the ACM, 51(1):107--113, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Facebook. Beringei. https://github.com/facebookarchive/beringei, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. P. Flajolet, E. Fusy, O. Gandouet, and et al. Hyperloglog: The analysis of a near-optimal cardinality estimation algorithm. In AOFA, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. influxdata. Influxdb. https://github.com/influxdata/influxdb, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Kiran, P. Murphy, I. Monga, J. Dugan, and S. S. Baveja. Lambda architecture for cost-effective batch and speed big data processing. In IEEE Big Data, pages 2785--2792, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. S. A. Noghabi, K. Paramasivam, Y. Pan, N. Ramesh, J. Bringhurst, I. Gupta, and R. H. Campbell. Samza: stateful scalable stream processing at linkedin. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 10(12):1634--1645, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. P. O'Neil, E. Cheng, D. Gawlick, and E. O'Neil. The log-structured merge-tree (lsm-tree). Acta Informatica, 33(4):351--385, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. T. Pelkonen, S. Franklin, J. Teller, P. Cavallaro, Q. Huang, J. Meza, and K. Veeraraghavan. Gorilla: A fast, scalable, in-memory time series database. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 8(12):1816--1827, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Welsh, D. Culler, and E. Brewer. Seda: an architecture for well-conditioned, scalable internet services. In ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, volume 35, pages 230--243. ACM, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. M. Zaharia, M. Chowdhury, T. Das, A. Dave, J. Ma, M. McCauley, M. J. Franklin, S. Shenker, and I. Stoica. Resilient distributed datasets: A fault-tolerant abstraction for in-memory cluster computing. In Proceedings of the 9th USENIX conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, pages 2--2. USENIX Association, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Timon: A Timestamped Event Database for Efficient Telemetry Data Processing and Analytics

      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 Conferences
        SIGMOD '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data
        June 2020
        2925 pages
        ISBN:9781450367356
        DOI:10.1145/3318464

        Copyright © 2020 Owner/Author

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 31 May 2020

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate785of4,003submissions,20%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader