Advertisement

Data Consistency Properties of Document Store as a Service (DSaaS): Using MongoDB Atlas as an Example

  • Chenhao HuangEmail author
  • Michael Cahill
  • Alan Fekete
  • Uwe Röhm
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11135)

Abstract

Document-oriented database systems, also known as document stores, are attractive for building modern web applications where the speed of development and deployment are critical, especially due to the prevalence of data in document-structured formats such as JSON and XML. MongoDB Atlas is a hosted offering of MongoDB as a Service, which is easy to set up, operate, and scale in the cloud. Like many NoSQL stores, MongoDB Atlas allows users to accept possible temporary inconsistency among the replicas, as a trade-off for lower latency and higher availability during partitions. In this work, we describe an empirical study to quantify the amount of inconsistency observed in data that is held in MongoDB Atlas.

Keywords

Document Storage as a Service (DSaaS) Consistency benchmarking NoSQL 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research forms part of the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project LP160100883. We thank Gary Little, Shahram Ghandeharizadeh, and Raghunath Nambiar for their comments on this paper. We also thank AWS Cloud Research Credits for their support.

References

  1. 1.
    Read preference - mongodb manual. https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/core/read-preference/. Accessed 02 June 2018
  2. 2.
    Write concern - mongodb manual. https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/write-concern/. Accessed 02 June 2018
  3. 3.
    Write concern for replica sets - mongodb manual. https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/core/replica-set-write-concern/. Accessed 02 June 2018
  4. 4.
    Abadi, D.: Consistency tradeoffs in modern distributed database system design: cap is only part of the story. Computer 45(2), 37–42 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alabdulkarim, Y., Almaymoni, M., Ghandeharizadeh, S.: Polygraph. Technical report 2017-02, Database Laboratory, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bailis, P., Venkataraman, S., Franklin, M.J., Hellerstein, J.M., Stoica, I.: Probabilistically bounded staleness for practical partial quorums. Proc. VLDB Endow. 5(8), 776–787 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bailis, P., Venkataraman, S., Franklin, M.J., Hellerstein, J.M., Stoica, I.: Quantifying eventual consistency with PBS. VLDB J. 23(2), 279–302 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bermbach, D.: Benchmarking eventually consistent distributed storage systems (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bermbach, D., Tai, S.: Eventual consistency: how soon is eventual? An evaluation of Amazon S3’s consistency behavior. In: Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Middleware for Service Oriented Computing, p. 1. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bermbach, D., Tai, S.: Benchmarking eventual consistency: lessons learned from long-term experimental studies. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E), pp. 47–56. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bermbach, D., Wittern, E., Tai, S.: Cloud Service Benchmarking. Springer, Heidelberg (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55483-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brewer, E.A.: Towards robust distributed systems. In: PODC, vol. 7 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    DeCandia, G., et al.: Dynamo: Amazon’s highly available key-value store. In: ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 41, pp. 205–220. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fekete, A.: Consumer-view of consistency properties: definition, measurement, and exploitation. https://www2.ucsc.edu/papoc-2016/Fekete-PaPoC-London.pdf. Accessed 03 June 2018
  15. 15.
    Golab, W., Rahman, M.R., AuYoung, A., Keeton, K., Li, X.S.: Eventually consistent: not what you were expecting? Queue 12(1), 30 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Golab, W., Rahman, M.R., AuYoung, A., Keeton, K., Gupta, I.: Client-centric benchmarking of eventual consistency for cloud storage systems. In: 2014 IEEE 34th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp. 493–502. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lu, H., et al.: Existential consistency: measuring and understanding consistency at Facebook. In: Proceedings of the 25th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 295–310. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shukla, D., et al.: Schema-agnostic indexing with Azure DocumentDB. Proc. VLDB Endow. 8(12), 1668–1679 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wada, H., Fekete, A., Zhao, L., Lee, K., Liu, A.: Data consistency properties and the trade-offs in commercial cloud storage: the consumers’ perspective. In: CIDR, vol. 11, pp. 134–143 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chenhao Huang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael Cahill
    • 2
  • Alan Fekete
    • 1
  • Uwe Röhm
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information TechnologiesUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.MongoDB Inc.SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations