Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mark Callaghan
dblp:71/4417
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 7 · 2 first-author
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 |
Storage systems · 43% Distributed systems · 23% Memory systems · 20% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers |
Graph data management · 62% Web and social media mining · 19% Indexing and storage engines · 9% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory systems
cache |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Key-Value Storage Engines · SIGMOD Conference 2020 |
Distributed systems
concurrency control |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Key-Value Storage Engines · SIGMOD Conference 2020 |
Storage systems
key-value storage |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Key-Value Storage Engines · SIGMOD Conference 2020 |
Storage systems › storage engine
storage engine design |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Key-Value Storage Engines · SIGMOD Conference 2020 |
Performance modeling and evaluation
benchmarking |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | LinkBench: a database benchmark based on the Facebook social graph · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Performance modeling and evaluation › benchmarking
database system benchmarking |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | LinkBench: a database benchmark based on the Facebook social graph · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Distributed systems › replication
database replication |
0.1 | 1 | 2008 | Rose: compressed, log-structured replication · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2008 |
Storage systems › key-value storage
LSM-tree |
0.1 | 1 | 2008 | Rose: compressed, log-structured replication · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2008 |
Web and social media mining
social network analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | LinkBench: a database benchmark based on the Facebook social graph · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control
concurrency control |
0.0 | 1 | 2008 | Rose: compressed, log-structured replication · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2008 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
page compression · 0.2LSM-tree · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Key-Value Storage EnginesabstractKey-value stores are everywhere. They power a diverse set of data-driven applications across both industry and science. Key-value stores are used as stand-alone NoSQL systems but they are also used as a part of more complex pipelines and systems such as machine learning and relational systems. In this tutorial, we survey the state-of-the-art approaches on how the core storage engine of a key-value store system is designed. We focus on several critical components of the engine, starting with the core data structures to lay out data across the memory hierarchy. We also discuss design issues related to caching, timestamps, concurrency control, updates, shifting workloads, as well as mixed workloads with both analytical and transactional characteristics. We cover designs that are read-optimized, write-optimized as well as hybrids. We draw examples from several state-of-the-art systems but we also put everything together in a general framework which allows us to model storage engine designs under a single unified model and reason about the expected behavior of diverse designs. In addition, we show that given the vast number of possible storage engine designs and their complexity, there is a need to be able to describe and communicate design decisions at a high level descriptive language and we present a first version of such a language. We then use that framework to present several open challenges in the field, especially in terms of supporting increasingly more diverse and dynamic applications in the era of data science and AI, including neural networks, graphs, and data versioning. Stratos Idreos, Mark Callaghan |
SIGMOD Conference | 2 |
| 2019 | Diversity of LSM tree shapes
Mark Callaghan |
CIDR | 1 |
| 2017 | How to Talk to People at Conferences
Mark Callaghan |
CIDR | 1 |
| 2017 | Optimizing Space Amplification in RocksDB
Siying Dong, Mark Callaghan, Leonidas Galanis, Dhruba Borthakur, Tony Savor, Michael Strum |
CIDR | 2 |
| 2016 | Designing Access Methods: The RUM ConjectureabstractThe database research community has been building methods to store, access, and update data for more than four decades. Throughout the evolution of the structures and techniques used to access data, access methods adapt to the ever changing hardware and workload requirements. Today, even small changes in the workload or the hardware lead to a redesign of access methods. The need for new designs has been increasing as data generation and workload diversification grow exponentially, and hardware advances introduce increased complexity. New workload requirements are introduced by the emergence of new applications, and data is managed by large systems composed of more and more complex and heterogeneous hardware. As a result, it is increasingly important to develop application-aware and hardware-aware access methods. The fundamental challenges that every researcher, systems architect, or designer faces when designing a new access method are how to minimize, i) read times (R), ii) update cost (U), and iii) memory (or storage) overhead (M). In this paper, we conjecture that when optimizing the read-update-memory overheads, optimizing in any two areas negatively impacts the third. We present a simple model of the RUM overheads, and we articulate the RUM Conjecture. We show how the RUM Conjecture manifests in stateof-the-art access methods, and we envision a trend toward RUMaware access methods for future data systems. Manos Athanassoulis, Michael S. Kester, Lukas M. Maas, Radu Stoica, Stratos Idreos, Anastasia Ailamaki, Mark Callaghan |
EDBT | 7 |
| 2013 | LinkBench: a database benchmark based on the Facebook social graphabstractDatabase benchmarks are an important tool for database researchers and practitioners that ease the process of making informed comparisons between different database hardware, software and configurations. Large scale web services such as social networks are a major and growing database application area, but currently there are few benchmarks that accurately model web service workloads. Timothy G. Armstrong, Vamsi Ponnekanti, Dhruba Borthakur, Mark Callaghan |
SIGMOD Conference | 4 |
| 2008 | Rose: compressed, log-structured replicationabstractRose is a database storage engine for high-throughput replication. It targets seek-limited, write-intensive transaction processing workloads that perform near real-time decision support and analytical processing queries. Rose uses log structured merge (LSM) trees to create full database replicas using purely sequential I/O, allowing it to provide orders of magnitude more write throughput than B-tree based replicas. Also, LSM-trees cannot become fragmented and provide fast, predictable index scans. Rose's write performance relies on replicas' ability to perform writes without looking up old values. LSM-tree lookups have performance comparable to B-tree lookups. If Rose read each value that it updated then its write throughput would also be comparable to a B-tree. Although we target replication, Rose provides high write throughput to any application that updates tuples without reading existing data, such as append-only, streaming and versioning databases. We introduce a page compression format that takes advantage of LSM-tree's sequential, sorted data layout. It increases replication throughput by reducing sequential I/O, and enables efficient tree lookups by supporting small page sizes and doubling as an index of the values it stores. Any scheme that can compress data in a single pass and provide random access to compressed values could be used by Rose. Replication environments have multiple readers but only one writer. This allows Rose to provide atomicity, consistency and isolation to concurrent transactions without resorting to rollback, blocking index requests or interfering with maintenance tasks. Rose avoids random I/O during replication and scans, leaving more I/O capacity for queries than existing systems, and providing scalable, real-time replication of seek-bound workloads. Analytical models and experiments show that Rose provides orders of magnitude greater replication bandwidth over larger databases than conventional techniques. Russell Sears, Mark Callaghan, Eric A. Brewer |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 2 |