Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Alex Shamis

dblp:168/8978 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0003-2337-0613ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 first-authorComputer networks · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
3 papers
Distributed systems · 80% Interconnection networks and networks-on-chip · 14% Cloud and datacenter computing · 3%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Transaction processing and concurrency control · 46% Graph data management · 27% Distributed and cloud data management · 27%
Network and information security
1 paper
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 77% Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 23%

Topics — the 12 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Graph data management › graph database
distributed graph database
0.412020
A1: A Distributed In-Memory Graph Database · SIGMOD Conference 2020
Distributed and cloud data management
distributed query processing
0.412020
A1: A Distributed In-Memory Graph Database · SIGMOD Conference 2020
Transaction processing and concurrency control
distributed transaction processing
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Transaction processing and concurrency control › serializability
strict serializability
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Distributed systems
fault tolerance
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
high availability
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Distributed systems
replication
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
transparent fault tolerance
0.412019
Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity · SIGMOD Conference 2019
Distributed systems › distributed database
distributed transactions
0.212015
No compromises: distributed transactions with consistency, availability, and performance · SOSP 2015
Interconnection networks and networks-on-chip › remote direct memory access
RDMA-based replication
0.212015
No compromises: distributed transactions with consistency, availability, and performance · SOSP 2015
Distributed systems › replication › replication and fault tolerance
replication and recovery
0.212015
No compromises: distributed transactions with consistency, availability, and performance · SOSP 2015
Interconnection networks and networks-on-chip
remote direct memory access
0.112020
A1: A Distributed In-Memory Graph Database · SIGMOD Conference 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

RDMA · 1.1FaRM · 0.9timestamp ordering · 0.8failover protocol · 0.8clock synchronization · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 IA-CCF: Individual Accountability for Permissioned Ledgers
Alex Shamis, Peter R. Pietzuch, Burcu Canakci, Miguel Castro 0001, Cédric Fournet, Edward Ashton, Amaury Chamayou, Sylvan Clebsch, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud, Matthew Kerner, Julien Maffre, Olga Vrousgou, Christoph M. Wintersteiger, Manuel Costa, Mark Russinovich
NSDI1
2021 AMP: authentication of media via provenance
abstract
Advances in graphics and machine learning have led to the general availability of easy-to-use tools for modifying and synthesizing media. The proliferation of these tools threatens to cast doubt on the veracity of all media. One approach to thwarting the flow of fake media is to detect modified or synthesized media through machine learning methods. While detection may help in the short term, we believe that it is destined to fail as the quality of fake media generation continues to improve. Soon, neither humans nor algorithms will be able to reliably distinguish fake versus real content. Thus, pipelines for assuring the source and integrity of media will be required---and increasingly relied upon. We present AMP, a system that ensures the authentication of media via certifying provenance. AMP creates one or more publisher-signed manifests for a media instance uploaded by a content provider. These manifests are stored in a database allowing fast lookup from applications such as browsers. For reference, the manifests are also registered and signed by a permissioned ledger, implemented using the Confidential Consortium Framework (CCF). CCF employs both software and hardware techniques to ensure the integrity and transparency of all registered manifests. AMP, through its use of CCF, enables a consortium of media providers to govern the service while making all its operations auditable. The authenticity of the media can be communicated to the user via visual elements in the browser, indicating that an AMP manifest has been successfully located and verified.
Paul England, Henrique S. Malvar, Eric Horvitz, Jack W. Stokes, Cédric Fournet, Rebecca Burke-Aguero, Amaury Chamayou, Sylvan Clebsch, Manuel Costa, John Deutscher, Shabnam Erfani, Matt Gaylor, Andrew Jenks, Kevin Kane, Elissa M. Redmiles, Alex Shamis, Isha Sharma, John C. Simmons, Sam Wenker, Anika Zaman
MMSys16
2020 A1: A Distributed In-Memory Graph Database
abstract
A1 is an in-memory distributed database used by the Bing search engine to support complex queries over structured data. The key enablers for A1 are availability of cheap DRAM and high speed RDMA (Remote Direct Memory Access) networking in commodity hardware. A1 uses FaRM [11,12] as its underlying storage layer and builds the graph abstraction and query engine on top. The combination of in-memory storage and RDMA access requires rethinking how data is allocated, organized and queried in a large distributed system. A single A1 cluster can store tens of billions of vertices and edges and support a throughput of 350+ million of vertex reads per second with end to end query latency in single digit milliseconds. In this paper we describe the A1 data model, RDMA optimized data structures and query execution.
Chiranjeeb Buragohain, Knut Magne Risvik, Paul Brett, Miguel Castro 0001, Wonhee Cho 0004, Joshua Cowhig, Nikolas Gloy, Karthik Kalyanaraman, Richendra Khanna, John Pao, Matthew Renzelmann, Alex Shamis, Timothy Tan, Shuheng Zheng
SIGMOD Conference12
2019 snmalloc: a message passing allocator
abstract
snmalloc is an implementation of malloc aimed at workloads in which objects are typically deallocated by a different thread than the one that had allocated them. We use the term producer/consumer for such workloads. snmalloc uses a novel message passing scheme which returns deallocated objects to the originating allocator in batches without taking any locks. It also uses a novel bump pointer-free list data structure with which just 64-bits of meta-data are sufficient for each 64 KiB slab. On such producer/consumer benchmarks our approach performs better than existing allocators. Snmalloc is available at https://github.com/Microsoft/snmalloc.
Paul Liétar, Theodore Butler, Sylvan Clebsch, Sophia Drossopoulou, Juliana Franco, Matthew J. Parkinson, Alex Shamis, Christoph M. Wintersteiger, David Chisnall
ISMM7
2019 Fast General Distributed Transactions with Opacity
abstract
Transactions can simplify distributed applications by hiding data distribution, concurrency, and failures from the application developer. Ideally the developer would see the abstraction of a single large machine that runs transactions sequentially and never fails. This requires the transactional subsystem to provide opacity (strict serializability for both committed and aborted transactions), as well as transparent fault tolerance with high availability. As even the best abstractions are unlikely to be used if they perform poorly, the system must also provide high performance. Existing distributed transactional designs either weaken this abstraction or are not designed for the best performance within a data center. This paper extends the design of FaRM --- which provides strict serializability only for committed transactions --- to provide opacity while maintaining FaRM's high throughput, low latency, and high availability within a modern data center. It uses timestamp ordering based on real time with clocks synchronized to within tens of microseconds across a cluster, and a failover protocol to ensure correctness across clock master failures. FaRM with opacity can commit 5.4 million neworder transactions per second when running the TPC-C transaction mix on 90 machines with 3-way replication.
Alex Shamis, Matthew Renzelmann, Stanko Novakovic, Georgios Chatzopoulos, Aleksandar Dragojevic, Dushyanth Narayanan, Miguel Castro 0001
SIGMOD Conference1
2015 No compromises: distributed transactions with consistency, availability, and performance
abstract
Transactions with strong consistency and high availability simplify building and reasoning about distributed systems. However, previous implementations performed poorly. This forced system designers to avoid transactions completely, to weaken consistency guarantees, or to provide single-machine transactions that require programmers to partition their data. In this paper, we show that there is no need to compromise in modern data centers. We show that a main memory distributed computing platform called FaRM can provide distributed transactions with strict serializability, high performance, durability, and high availability. FaRM achieves a peak throughput of 140 million TATP transactions per second on 90 machines with a 4.9 TB database, and it recovers from a failure in less than 50 ms. Key to achieving these results was the design of new transaction, replication, and recovery protocols from first principles to leverage commodity networks with RDMA and a new, inexpensive approach to providing non-volatile DRAM.
Aleksandar Dragojevic, Dushyanth Narayanan, Ed Nightingale, Matthew Renzelmann, Alex Shamis, Anirudh Badam, Miguel Castro 0001
SOSP5