Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sergey Pershin
dblp:228/6093
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0009-0008-1406-1804ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 2 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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
3 papers |
Distributed and cloud data management · 36% Transaction processing and concurrency control · 26% Query processing and optimization · 17% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Cloud and datacenter computing · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Distributed and cloud data management › distributed query processing
distributed query engine |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Presto: A Decade of SQL Analytics at Meta · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2023 |
Distributed and cloud data management › data partitioning
sharding |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Interactive Analytic DBMSs: Breaching the Scalability Wall · ICDE 2021 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control
concurrency control |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Rethinking Concurrency Control for In-Memory OLAP DBMSs · ICDE 2018 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control › synchronization
lock-free algorithms |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Rethinking Concurrency Control for In-Memory OLAP DBMSs · ICDE 2018 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control › isolation levels
snapshot isolation |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Rethinking Concurrency Control for In-Memory OLAP DBMSs · ICDE 2018 |
Cloud and datacenter computing
cluster resource management and scheduling |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Interactive Analytic DBMSs: Breaching the Scalability Wall · ICDE 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
presto on spark · 0.7native vectorized execution · 0.7materialized views · 0.7hierarchical caching · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Presto: A Decade of SQL Analytics at MetaabstractPresto is an open-source distributed SQL query engine that supports analytics workloads involving multiple exabyte-scale data sources. Presto is used for low-latency interactive use cases as well as long-running ETL jobs at Meta. It was originally launched at Meta in 2013 and donated to the Linux Foundation in 2019. Over the last ten years, upholding query latency and scalability with the hyper growth of data volume at Meta as well as new SQL analytics requirements have raised impressive challenges for Presto. A top priority has been ensuring query reliability does not regress with the shift towards smaller, more elastic container allocation, which requires queries to run with substantially smaller memory headroom and can be preempted at any time. Additionally, new demands from machine learning, privacy, and graph analytics have driven Presto maintainers to think beyond traditional data analytics. In this paper, we discuss several successful evolutions in recent years that have improved Presto latency as well as scalability by several orders of magnitude in production at Meta. Some of the notable ones are hierarchical caching, native vectorized execution engines, materialized views, and Presto on Spark. With these new capabilities, we have deprecated or are in the process of deprecating various legacy query engines so that Presto becomes the single piece to serve interactive, ad-hoc, ETL, and graph processing workloads for the entire data warehouse. Yutian Sun, Tim Meehan, Rebecca Schlussel, Wenlei Xie, Masha Basmanova, Orri Erling, Andrii Rosa, Shixuan Fan, Rongrong Zhong, Arun Thirupathi, Nikhil Collooru, Dionysios Logothetis, Kostas Xirogiannopoulos, Varun Gajjala, Rohit Jain, Ajay Palakuzhy, Prithvi Pandian, Sergey Pershin, Abhisek Saikia, Pranjal Shankhdhar, Neerad Somanchi, Swapnil Tailor, Jialiang Tan, Sreeni Viswanadha, Zac Wen, Biswapesh Chattopadhyay, Deepak Majeti, Aditi Pandit |
Proc. ACM Manag. Data | 22 |
| 2021 | Interactive Analytic DBMSs: Breaching the Scalability WallabstractAnalytic DBMSs optimized for query interactivity commonly push the computation down to storage nodes, thus avoiding large network transfers and keeping query execution wall-time to a minimum. In these systems, data is sharded and stored locally by cluster nodes, which must all participate in query execution. As the system scales-out, hardware failures and other non-deterministic sources of tail latency start to dominate, to a point where query latency and success ratio increasingly violate the system's SLA. We refer to this tipping point as the system's scalability wall, when sharding data between more nodes only worsens the problem.This paper describes how an analytic DBMS optimized for low-latency queries can breach the scalability wall by sharding different tables to different subsets of cluster nodes - a strategy we call partial sharding - and reduce the query fan-out. Because partial sharding requires the DBMS to implement many tedious and complex shard management tasks, such as shard mapping, load balancing and fault tolerance, this paper describes how a database system can leverage an external general-purpose shard management service for such tasks. We present a case study based on Cubrick, an in-memory analytic DBMS developed at Facebook, highlighting the integration points with a shard management framework called Shard Manager. Finally, we describe the many design decisions, pitfalls and lessons learned during this process, which eventually allowed Cubrick to scale to thousands of nodes. Pedro Pedreira, Sergey Pershin, Sushant Shringarpure, Jialiang Tan, Brian Landers, Karen Pieper |
ICDE | 3 |
| 2018 | Rethinking Concurrency Control for In-Memory OLAP DBMSsabstractAlthough OLTP and OLAP database systems have fundamentally disparate architectures, most research work on concurrency control is geared towards transactional systems and simply adopted by OLAP DBMSs. In this paper we describe a new concurrency control protocol specifically designed for analytical DBMSs that can provide Snapshot Isolation for distributed in-memory OLAP database systems, called Append-Only Snapshot Isolation (AOSI). Unlike previous work, which are either based on multiversion concurrency control (MVCC) or Two Phase Locking (2PL), AOSI is completely lock-free and always maintains a single version of each data item. In addition, it removes the need for per-record timestamps of traditional MVCC implementations and thus considerably reduces the memory overhead incurred by concurrency control. In order to support these characteristics, the protocol sacrifices flexibility and removes support for a few operations, particularly record updates and single record deletions; however, we argue that even though these operations are essential in a pure transactional system, they are not strictly required in most analytic pipelines and OLAP systems. We also present an experimental evaluation of AOSI's current implementation within the Cubrick in-memory OLAP DBMS at Facebook, and show that lock-free single-version Snapshot Isolation can be achieved with low memory overhead and minor impact in query latency. Pedro Pedreira, Yinghai Lu, Sergey Pershin, Chris Croswhite |
ICDE | 3 |