Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Peter Macko
dblp:85/147
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
5as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0002-8320-4329ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 6 · 3 first-author · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 4 · 3 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
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
4 papers |
Storage systems · 88% Cloud and datacenter computing · 6% Distributed systems · 6% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Graph data management · 100% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Operating systems · 66% Software maintenance and evolution · 34% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Storage systems › file systems
distributed file system |
1.0 | 2 | 2022 | Survey of Distributed File System Design Choices · ACM Trans. Storage 2022 FlexGroup Volumes: A Distributed WAFL File System · USENIX ATC 2019 |
Storage systems
file systems |
0.5 | 2 | 2019 | FlexGroup Volumes: A Distributed WAFL File System · USENIX ATC 2019 Tracking Back References in a Write-Anywhere File System · FAST 2010 |
Graph data management
graph analytics |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | LLAMA: Efficient graph analytics using Large Multiversioned Arrays · ICDE 2015 |
Graph data management
graph storage |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | LLAMA: Efficient graph analytics using Large Multiversioned Arrays · ICDE 2015 |
Graph data management › graph processing
out-of-core graph processing |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | LLAMA: Efficient graph analytics using Large Multiversioned Arrays · ICDE 2015 |
Storage systems
distributed storage |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Survey of Distributed File System Design Choices · ACM Trans. Storage 2022 |
Visualization and visual analytics › graph visualization
node-link diagram |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Evaluation of Filesystem Provenance Visualization Tools · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2013 |
Visualization and visual analytics › information visualization › metadata visualization
provenance visualization |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Evaluation of Filesystem Provenance Visualization Tools · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2013 |
Cloud and datacenter computing
cloud data management |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Provenance for the Cloud · FAST 2010 |
Distributed systems
data provenance |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Provenance for the Cloud · FAST 2010 |
Operating systems
provenance |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | Layering in Provenance Systems · USENIX ATC 2009 |
Storage systems › file systems
file-system metadata |
0.0 | 1 | 2010 | Tracking Back References in a Write-Anywhere File System · FAST 2010 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
survey · 0.6time-based hierarchical node grouping · 0.3quantitative evaluation · 0.3multi-versioned snapshots · 0.2compressed sparse row · 0.2layering · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Survey of Distributed File System Design ChoicesabstractDecades of research on distributed file systems and storage systems exists. New researchers and engineers have a lot of literature to study, but only a comparatively small number of high-level design choices are available when creating a distributed file system. And within each aspect of the system, typically several common approaches are used. So, rather than surveying distributed file systems, this article presents a survey of important design decisions and, within those decisions, the most commonly used options. It also presents a qualitative exploration of their tradeoffs. We include several relatively recent designs and their variations that illustrate other tradeoff choices in the design space, despite being underexplored. In doing so, we provide a primer on distributed file systems, and we also show areas that are overexplored and underexplored, in the hopes of inspiring new research. Peter Macko, Jason Hennessey |
ACM Trans. Storage | 1 |
| 2019 | FlexGroup Volumes: A Distributed WAFL File System
Ram Kesavan, Jason Hennessey, Richard Jernigan, Peter Macko, Keith A. Smith, Daniel Tennant, Bharadwaj V. R. |
USENIX ATC | 4 |
| 2015 | LLAMA: Efficient graph analytics using Large Multiversioned ArraysabstractWe present LLAMA, a graph storage and analysis system that supports mutability and out-of-memory execution. LLAMA performs comparably to immutable main-memory analysis systems for graphs that fit in memory and significantly outperforms existing out-of-memory analysis systems for graphs that exceed main memory. LLAMA bases its implementation on the compressed sparse row (CSR) representation, which is a read-only representation commonly used for graph analytics. We augment this representation to support mutability and persistence using a novel implementation of multi-versioned array snapshots, making it ideal for applications that receive a steady stream of new data, but need to perform whole-graph analysis on consistent views of the data. We compare LLAMA to state-of-the-art systems on representative graph analysis workloads, showing that LLAMA scales well both out-of-memory and across parallel cores. Our evaluation shows that LLAMA's mutability introduces modest overheads of 3-18% relative to immutable CSR for in-memory execution and that it outperforms state-of-the-art out-of-memory systems in most cases, with a best case improvement of 5x on breadth-first-search. Peter Macko, Virendra J. Marathe, Daniel W. Margo, Margo I. Seltzer |
ICDE | 1 |
| 2013 | Local clustering in provenance graphsabstractSystems that capture and store data provenance, the record of how an object has arrived at its current state, accumulate historical metadata over time, forming a large graph. Local clustering in these graphs, in which we start with a seed vertex and grow a cluster around it, is of paramount importance because it supports critical provenance applications such as identifying semantically meaningful tasks in an object's history. However, generic graph clustering algorithms are not effective at these tasks. We identify three key properties of provenance graphs and exploit them to justify two new centrality metrics we developed for use in performing local clustering on provenance graphs. Peter Macko, Daniel W. Margo, Margo I. Seltzer |
CIKM | 1 |
| 2013 | Performance introspection of graph databasesabstractThe explosion of graph data in social and biological networks, recommendation systems, provenance databases, etc. makes graph storage and processing of paramount importance. We present a performance introspection framework for graph databases, PIG, which provides both a toolset and methodology for understanding graph database performance. PIG consists of a hierarchical collection of benchmarks that compose to produce performance models; the models provide a way to illuminate the strengths and weaknesses of a particular implementation. The suite has three layers of benchmarks: primitive operations, composite access patterns, and graph algorithms. While the framework could be used to compare different graph database systems, its primary goal is to help explain the observed performance of a particular system. Such introspection allows one to evaluate the degree to which systems exploit their knowledge of graph access patterns. We present both the PIG methodology and infrastructure and then demonstrate its efficacy by analyzing the popular Neo4j and DEX graph databases. Peter Macko, Daniel W. Margo, Margo I. Seltzer |
SYSTOR | 1 |
| 2013 | Evaluation of Filesystem Provenance Visualization ToolsabstractHaving effective visualizations of filesystem provenance data is valuable for understanding its complex hierarchical structure. The most common visual representation of provenance data is the node-link diagram. While effective for understanding local activity, the node-link diagram fails to offer a high-level summary of activity and inter-relationships within the data. We present a new tool, InProv, which displays filesystem provenance with an interactive radial-based tree layout. The tool also utilizes a new time-based hierarchical node grouping method for filesystem provenance data we developed to match the user's mental model and make data exploration more intuitive. We compared InProv to a conventional node-link based tool, Orbiter, in a quantitative evaluation with real users of filesystem provenance data including provenance data experts, IT professionals, and computational scientists. We also compared in the evaluation our new node grouping method to a conventional method. The results demonstrate that InProv results in higher accuracy in identifying system activity than Orbiter with large complex data sets. The results also show that our new time-based hierarchical node grouping method improves performance in both tools, and participants found both tools significantly easier to use with the new time-based node grouping method. Subjective measures show that participants found InProv to require less mental activity, less physical activity, less work, and is less stressful to use. Our study also reveals one of the first cases of gender differences in visualization; both genders had comparable performance with InProv, but women had a significantly lower average accuracy (56%) compared to men (70%) with Orbiter. Michelle Borkin, Chelsea S. Yeh, Madelaine Boyd, Peter Macko, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, Margo I. Seltzer, Hanspeter Pfister |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 4 |
| 2010 | Tracking Back References in a Write-Anywhere File System
Peter Macko, Margo I. Seltzer, Keith A. Smith |
FAST | 1 |
| 2010 | Provenance for the Cloud
Kiran-Kumar Muniswamy-Reddy, Peter Macko, Margo I. Seltzer |
FAST | 2 |
| 2009 | Layering in Provenance Systems
Kiran-Kumar Muniswamy-Reddy, Uri Braun, David A. Holland, Peter Macko, Diana L. MacLean, Daniel W. Margo, Margo I. Seltzer, Robin Smogor |
USENIX ATC | 4 |