Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background
Locating Data
Data Identifier
Latest Work and Summary
Overview of DHTS
Data Integration
Data Mappings
Current Research in P2P Data Integration
Conclusion
Query Processing in Data Sharing P2P Systems
Data Consistency Issues
Overview
New Data Consistency Issues in P2P
Solutions to Data Consistency Issues in P2P
Summary
Conclusions
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Database Systems

A Survey of Data Management in Peer-to-Peer Systems

Profile image of ROLANDO BLANCOROLANDO BLANCO

2006

Abstract
sparkles

AI

This survey analyzes data management challenges in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems, which excel at sharing large resources. Key issues include data location, query processing, data integration, and data consistency. Proposing a reference architecture that delineates essential components such as query interfaces, a data management layer, and a P2P infrastructure, the survey classifies existing research correlating to these components, ultimately providing strategies for tackling the identified challenges in structured data sharing.

Related papers

Data Management in P2P Systems
Ana Carolina Salgado

2006

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems are massively distributed and highly volatile systems for sharing large amounts of resources. In these systems, peers communicate through a self-organizing and fault tolerant network topology which runs as an overlay on the top of a physical network. Initially developed to allow the sharing of unstructured data (e.g. music and video), recently the proposed P2P systems attempt to provide support for sharing structured and semi-structured data. In general, there are some data management issues that must be addressed when dealing with the scale and volatility of P2P systems: schema mapping, query processing and connection management. In this tutorial we discuss the main solutions that have been proposed to address these important data management issues in P2P systems.

View PDFchevron_right
Topics in Database Systems: Data Management in Peer-to-Peer Systems Survey of Peer-to-Peer Systems
Vicki Tziovara

Peer-to-peer (P2P) networking has generated tremendous interest worldwide among Internet users as well as computer professionals. P2P systems like Kazaa and Napster rank amongst the most popular software applications ever. P2P systems have become popular Internet applications since the arrival of Napster and other P2P architectures used for music file sharing. Several businesses and Web sites have promoted P2P technology as the future of Internet networking. In recent years, peer-to-peer systems have emerged as an interesting architecture for implementing distributed file systems. In a P2P network, end users share resources which are able to exchange. Information is distributed among the member nodes instead of being concentrated at a single server. A successful P2P file-sharing network must have some desirable properties, such as ease of use, ability to expand over large numbers of peers, produce results despite node failures and find infrequent items. This survey of P2P systems presents different system architectures used for file-sharing and query routing protocols. We discuss more complex queries, such as range queries over one or more attributes and replication techniques. Finally, we refer to algorithms for updating replicas.

View PDFchevron_right
The Essence of P2P: A Reference Architecture for Overlay Networks
seif haridi

2005

The success of the P2P idea has created a huge diversity of approaches, among which overlay networks, for example, Gnutella, Kazaa, Chord, Pastry, Tapestry, P-Grid, or DKS, have received specific attention from both developers and researchers. A wide variety of algorithms, data structures, and architectures have been proposed. The terminologies and abstractions used, however, have become quite inconsistent since the P2P paradigm has attracted people from many different communities, e.g., networking, databases, distributed systems, graph theory, complexity theory, biology, etc. In this paper we propose a reference model for overlay networks which is capable of modeling different approaches in this domain in a generic manner. It is intended to allow researchers and users to assess the properties of concrete systems, to establish a common vocabulary for scientific discussion, to facilitate the qualitative comparison of the systems, and to serve as the basis for defining a standardized API to make overlay networks interoperable.

View PDFchevron_right
Interoperability for Peer-to-Peer Networks: Opening P2P to the rest of the World
Matthias Palmér

2005

Due to the information growth, distributed environments are offered as a feasible and scalable solution where Peerto-Peer networks have become more relevant. They bring many advantages as high flexibility for peers to join or leave the network dynamically, scalability, autonomy and high resilience against peer failures. However, the use of proprietary interfaces within the network and the requirement that peers must implement them to join makes P2P networks unable to interact with other systems and environments, isolating the network as a whole. In this paper, we report on a solution based on a proxy-based architecture and semantic mappings in order to allow the sharing of content between peers within a P2P network with content from other systems outside the network.

View PDFchevron_right
A Flexible Architecture for a Push-based P2P Database
Christopher Popfinger

Workshop Grundlagen von Datenbanken, 2004

Originally developed for file sharing, P2P concepts are predestinated to realize infor- mation sharing in a more general way. Combined with the well known concept of loosely coupled multidatabases they provide a promising fundament for sharing data and metadata across autonomous and heterogenous data sources. The D´õgame architecture allows each participating data source to decide autonomously, which kind of information

View PDFchevron_right
A Hybrid Topology Architecture for P2P Systems
Ling Liu

A core area of P2P systems research is the topology of the overlay network. It has ranged from random unstructured networks like Gnutella [8] to architectures to the recent trend of structured overlays based on Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) . While the unstructured networks have excessive lookup costs and un-guaranteed lookups, the structured systems offer no anonymity and delegate control over data items to unrelated peers. In this paper, we present an in-themiddle hybrid architecture which uses a mix of both topologies to create a decentralized P2P infrastructure. The system provides scalable and guaranteed lookups in addition to mutual anonymity and also allows hosting content with the content-owner. We validate our architecture through a thorough analytical and empirical performance analysis of the system.

View PDFchevron_right
A Hybrid Architecture for Content Consistency and Peer Synchronization in Cooperative P2P Environments
Carlo Mastroianni

Proceedings of the Third International ICST Conference on Scalable Information Systems, 2008

Peer-to-Peer architectures for content and knowledge management foster the creation of communities of workers in which effective knowledge and information sharing takes place. In such communities, workers have similar capabilities in providing other workers with data and/or services and are autonomous in managing their own knowledge objects. Since objects are typically shared among a set of workers, problems regarding concurrent access to content, content consistency and synchronization of peers arise. This paper describes a hybrid architecture for the management of data consistency and peer synchronization. The designed framework combines centralized, yet dynamic, mechanisms for metadata management and peer-topeer mechanisms for data transfer. The paper reports on the use of these mechanisms in K-link+ a P2P collaborative platform, developed at the GridLab of the University of Calabria, for distributed knowledge management. An analytical study founded on queue network theory confirms the efficiency of the presented approach.

View PDFchevron_right
APRE: A replication method for unstructured P2P networks
Dimitrios Tsoumakos

2006

We present APRE, a replication method for structureless Peer-to-Peer overlays. The goal of our method is to achieve real-time replication of even the most sparsely located content relative to demand. APRE adaptively expands or contracts the replica set of an object in order to improve the sharing process and achieve a low load distribution among the providers. To achieve that, it utilizes search knowledge to identify possible replication targets inside query-intensive areas of the overlay. We present detailed simulation results where APRE exhibits both efficiency and robustness relative to the number of requesters and the respective request rates. The scheme proves particularly useful in the event of flash crowds, managing to quickly adapt to sudden surges in load.

View PDFchevron_right
Overview of Service Oriented Architecture for Resource Management in P2P Systems
Farag Azzedin

Models, Methodologies and Applications, 2010

View PDFchevron_right
Tierpeer: A Three-Tier Framework for P2P Applications
Abolhassan Shamsaie

IJCSNS, 2007

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) gained a lot of interest these days and variety of P2P applications are increasing too. Among these all applications, P2P frameworks try to simplify the development process. In past, they provided some high level functions and had a static architecture dedicated to a network structure or topology. In present, complex applications have become more interesting. For instance, applications require communicating with numbers of different overlay networks, topologies and underlying networks. An open and flexible architecture would be interesting in such cases. Changes and updates of applications make them difficult to maintain. Extendible and pluggable architecture can reduce change and update costs which lead to reduce the maintenance costs. Thus, the need to a new generation of P2P frameworks to support these requirements is inevitable. In this paper, we propose a new extendable framework with a flexible architecture. This framework so-called TierPeer is based on three-tier model of client-server paradigm and OSI model of distributed system paradigm.

View PDFchevron_right

References (118)

  1. • Rolando Blanco et al. University of Waterloo (UW): University of Toronto (UT): Areas(area id, name, description) Project(projID, name, desc)
  2. Projects(proj id, area id, name) Student(studID, fname, lname, status)
  3. Publications(pub id, title, year, howpublished) Faculty(facID, fname, lname, rank, office)
  4. AuthorPublications(author id, pub id) ProjMember(projID, memberID)
  5. ProjectPublications(proj id, pub id) Paper(paperID, title, forum, year)
  6. Researcher(res id, name) Author(authorID, paperID)
  7. ProjectMembers(res id, proj id, role)
  8. ProjArea(projName, areaID)
  9. Author(pubID, author)
  10. Member(projName, member) REFERENCES
  11. Aberer, K., Cudr-Mauroux, P., and Hauswirth, M. 2003. The chatty web: Emergent semantics through gossiping. In WWW '03: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on World Wide Web. ACM Press, 197-206.
  12. Aberer, K., Cudre-Mauroux, P., and Hauswirth, M. 2003. Start making sense: The Chatty Web approach for global semantic agreements. Journal of Web semantics 1(1), December 1, 1.
  13. Adar, E. and Huberman., B. A. 2000. Free riding on gnutella. Tech. rep., Xerox PARC. August. Andersen, D. 2005. Overlay networks: Networking on top of the network. http://dps.uibk.ac.at/index.pl/publications?proxiedUrl=httpews.com
  14. Andrzejak, A. and Xu, Z. 2002. Scalable, efficient range queries for grid information services. In P2P '02: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 33.
  15. Arenas, M., Kantere, V., Kementsietsidis, A., Kiringa, I., Miller, R. J., and Mylopoulos, J. 2003. The hyperion project: From data integration to data coordination. ACM SIGMOD Record 32, 3.
  16. Aspnes, J. and Shah, G. 2003. Skip graphs. In SODA '03: Proceedings of the fourteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 384-393.
  17. Balke, W.-T., Nejdl, W., Siberski, W., and Thaden, U. 2005. Progressive distributed top-k re- trieval in peer-to-peer networks. In ICDE '05: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE'05). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 174-185.
  18. Bernstein, P., Giunchiglia, F., Kementsietsidis, A., Mylopoulos, J., Serafini, L., and Za- ihrayeu, I. 2002. Data management for peer-to-peer computing: A vision. In Workshop on the Web and Databases, WebDB.
  19. Bharambe, A. R., Agrawal, M., and Seshan, S. 2004. Mercury: supporting scalable multi- attribute range queries. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 34, 4, 353-366.
  20. Bickson, D. and Malkhi, D. 2003. A study of privacy in file sharing networks. Tech. rep., Leibniz Research Center, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
  21. Birman, K. 2000. Technology challenges for virtual overlay networks. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security. West Point, NY, USA, 200-206. BitTorrent 2005. BitTorrent. http://www.bittorrent.com/.
  22. • Rolando Blanco et al.
  23. Cai, M. and Frank, M. 2004. Rdfpeers: a scalable distributed rdf repository based on a structured peer-to-peer network. In WWW '04: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 650-657.
  24. Cai, M., Frank, M., Chen, J., and Szekely, P. 2003. Maan: A multi-attribute addressable network for grid information services. In GRID '03: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Grid Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 184.
  25. Castro, M., Druschel, P., Kermarrec, A., Nandi, A., Rowstron, A., and Singh, A. 2003. Splitstream: High-bandwidth content distribution in cooperative environments. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS '03). Berkeley, California, USA. Chawathe, Y., Ratnasamy, S., Breslau, L., Lanham, N., and Shenker, S. 2003. Making gnutella-like p2p systems scalable. In SIGCOMM '03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 407-418.
  26. Clarke, I., Miller, S. G., Hong, T. W., Sandberg, O., and Wiley, B. 2002. Protecting free expression online with freenet. IEEE Internet Computing 6, 1, 40-49.
  27. Clarke, I., Sandberg, O., Wiley, B., and Hong, T. W. 2001. Freenet: a distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. In International workshop on Designing privacy enhancing technologies. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 46-66.
  28. Cohen, B. 2003. Incentives build robustness in bittorrent. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems. Berkeley, California, USA.
  29. Cox, R., Muthitacharoen, A., and Morris, R. 2002. Serving dns using a peer-to-peer lookup service. In IPTPS '01: Revised Papers from the First International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems. Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 155-165.
  30. Crespo, A. and Garcia-Molina, H. 2002. Routing indices for peer-to-peer systems. In ICDCS '02: Proceedings of the 22 nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS'02). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 23.
  31. Cuenca-Acuna, F. M., Peery, C., Martin, R. P., and Nguyen, T. D. 2003. Planetp: Using gossiping to build content addressable peer-to-peer information sharing communities. In HPDC '03: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing (HPDC'03). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 236.
  32. Dabek, F., Brunskill, E., Kaashoek, M., Karger, D., Morris, R., Stoica, I., and Balakr- ishnan, H. 2001. Building peer-to-peer systems with chord, a distributed lookup service. In HOTOS '01: Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 81.
  33. Dabek, F., Kaashoek, M. F., Karger, D., Morris, R., and Stoica, I. 2001. Wide-area co- operative storage with cfs. In SOSP '01: Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 202-215.
  34. Datta, A., Hauswirth, M., and Aberer, K. 2003. Updates in highly unreliable, replicated peer-to-peer systems. In ICDCS '03: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 76.
  35. Dhamija, R., Feldman, M., and Garcia-Martinez, A. 2002. Peer-to-peer privacy and anonymity. http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/˜mfeldman/research/p2p privacy.ps.
  36. Doan, A. 2005. Learning to live with semantic heterogeneity. In Dagstuhl Seminar, "Machine Learning for the Semantic Web". http://www.smi.ucd.ie/Dagstuhl-MLSW/proceedings/.
  37. Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Dhamankar, R., Domingos, P., and Halevy, A. 2003. Learning to match ontologies on the semantic web. The VLDB Journal 12, 4, 303-319. edonkey2000 2005. eDonkey2000 -Overnet. http://www.edonkey2000.com/.
  38. Edutella 2005. Edutella Project. http://edutella.jxta.org. eXeem 2005. eXeem. http://www.exeem.com/.
  39. Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, P., and Faloutsos, C. 1999. On power-law relationships of the internet topology. In SIGCOMM '99: Proceedings of the conference on Applications, technolo- gies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 251-262.
  40. FastTrack 2002. Fasttrack peer-to-peer technology company. http://www.fasttrack.nu/. FasttrackSuperNode 2005. Peer-to-peer technologies and protocols. http://matrix.netsoc.tcd.ie/˜neo/4ba2/p2p/#fasttrack.
  41. Galanis, L., Wang, Y., Jeffery, S. R., and DeWitt, D. J. 2003. Processing Queries in a Large Peer-to-Peer System. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2681. Springer-Verlag GmbH, 273-288.
  42. Ganesan, P., Gummadi, K., and Garcia-Molina, H. 2004. Canon in g major: Designing dhts with hierarchical structure. In ICDCS '04: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS'04). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 263-272.
  43. Gansen, P., Bawa, M., and Garcia-Molina, H. 2004. Online Balancing of Range Partitioned Data with Applications to Peer-to-Peer Systems. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Very Large Databases VLDB. 444-455.
  44. Gnutella 2005. Gnutella. http://rfc-gnutella.sourceforge.net/.
  45. Good, N. S. and Krekelberg, A. 2003. Usability and privacy: a study of kazaa p2p file-sharing.
  46. In CHI '03: Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, 137-144.
  47. Gummadi, K., Gummadi, R., Gribble, S., Ratnasamy, S., Shenker, S., and Stoica, I. 2003. The impact of dht routing geometry on resilience and proximity. In SIGCOMM '03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications. ACM Press.
  48. Gummadi, K. P., Dunn, R. J., Saroiu, S., Gribble, S. D., Levy, H. M., and Zahorjan, J. 2003. Measurement, modeling, and analysis of a peer-to-peer file-sharing workload. In SOSP '03: Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles. ACM Press, 314-329.
  49. Gupta, A., Agrawal, D., and Abbadi, A. 2003. Approximate Range Selection Queries in Peer- to-Peer Systems. In Proceedings of the First Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR).
  50. Halevy, A. Y., Ives, Z. G., Suciu, D., and Tatarinov, I. 2003. Schema Mediation in Peer Data Management Systems . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE. 505.
  51. Halevy, A. Y., Ives, Z. G., Suciu, D., and Tatarivov, I. 2004. Schema mediation for large-scale semantic data sharing. VLDB Journal.
  52. Harvey, N., Jones, M., Saroiu, S., Theimer, M., and Wolman, A. 2003. Skipnet: A scalable overlay network with practical locality properties. In Proceedings of 4th USENIX Symp. on Internet Tech. and Syst. (USITS), 2003. ACM Press.
  53. Harvey, N. J. A., Jones, M. B., Theimer, M., and Wolman, A. 2003. Efficient Recovery from Organizational Disconnects in SkipNet. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2735. Springer-Verlag GmbH, 183-196.
  54. Heckmann, O. and Bock, A. 2002. The eDonkey 2000 Protocol. Tech. Rep. KOM-TR-08-2002, Multimedia Communications Lab, Darmstadt University of Technology. December.
  55. Heckmann, O., Liebau, N., Darlagiannis, V., Bock, A., Mauthe, A., and Steinmetz, R. 2005. From Integrated Publication and Information Systems to Information and Knowledge Environments: Essays Dedicated to Erich J. Neuhold on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3379. Springer-Verlag GmbH, Chapter A Peer-to-Peer Content Distribution Network, 69-78.
  56. Hellerstein, J. M. 2003. Toward network data independence. SIGMOD Rec. 32, 3, 34-40.
  57. Howard, J. H., Kazar, M. L., Menees, S. G., Nichols, D. A., Satyanarayanan, M., Side- botham, R. N., and West, M. J. 1988. Scale and performance in a distributed file system. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 6, 1, 51-81.
  58. Huebsch, R., Hellerstein, J., Lanham, B., S., L., and Stoica, I. 2003. Querying the Internet with PIER . In Proceedings of the 29th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB).
  59. • Rolando Blanco et al.
  60. Hughes, D., Coulson, G., and Walkerdine, J. 2005. Free riding on gnutella revisited: the bell tolls? Draft at http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/users/hughesdr/papers/freeriding.pdf. IRIS 2005. Project IRIS (Infrastructure for Resilient Internet Systems) Web-site . http://project- iris.net/.
  61. Iyer, S., Rowstron, A., and Druschel, P. 2002. Squirrel: a decentralized peer-to-peer web cache. In PODC '02: Proceedings of the twenty-first annual symposium on Principles of dis- tributed computing. ACM Press, 213-222.
  62. Jain, S., Mahajan, R., and Wetherall, D. 2003. A study of the performance potential of dht-based overlays. In Proceedings of the 4th Usenix Symposium on Internet Technologies (USITS), March 2003.
  63. Kaashoek, M. F. and Karger, D. R. 2003. Koorde: A Simple Degree-Optimal Distributed Hash Table. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2735. Springer-Verlag GmbH, 98-107.
  64. Kalnis, P., Ng, W. S., Ooi, B. C., Papadias, D., and Tan, K.-L. 2002. An adaptive peer-to-peer network for distributed caching of olap results. In SIGMOD '02: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 25-36.
  65. Kantere, V., Mylopoulos, J., and Kiringa, I. 2003. A distributed rule mechanism for multi- database systems. Springer-Verlag LNCS, 56-73.
  66. Karp, B., Ratnasamy, S., Rhea, S., and Shenker, S. 2004. Spurring adoption of dhts with openhash, a public dht service. In 3rd International Peer To Peer Systems Workshop (IPTPS 2004). ACM Press.
  67. KaZaAFileFormat 2003. KaZaA P2P FastTrack File Formats -2003-10-12. http://home.hetnet.nl/˜frejon55/.
  68. KazaaMediaDesktop 2005. KaZaA media desktop. http://www.kazaa.com/.
  69. Kementsietsidis, A., Arenas, M., and Miller, R. J. 2003a. Managing data mappings in the hyperion project. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE). 732-734.
  70. Kementsietsidis, A., Arenas, M., and Miller, R. J. 2003b. Mapping data in peer-to-peer systems: Semantics and algorithmic issues. In SIGMOD '03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data. ACM Press, 325-336.
  71. Kubiatowicz, J., Bindel, D., Chen, Y., Czerwinski, S., Eaton, P., Geels, D., Gummadi, R., Rhea, S., Weatherspoon, H., Wells, C., and Zhao, B. 2000. Oceanstore: an architecture for global-scale persistent storage. In ASPLOS-IX: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Architectural support for programming languages and operating systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 190-201.
  72. Kulbak, Y. and Bickson, D. 2005. The emule protocol specification. Tech. rep., Leibniz Research Center, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.
  73. Kumar, A., Xu, J. J., and Zegura, E. W. 2005. Efficient and scalable query routing for unstruc- tured peer-to-peer networks. Unpublished Work. Available at http://www.cc.gatech.edu/ aku- mar/sqr.pdf.
  74. Lenzerini, M. 2002. Data integration: A theoretical perspective. In Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS). 233-246.
  75. Liang, J., Kumar, R., and Ross, K. 2004a. Understanding KaZaA. http://cis.poly.edu/˜ross/papers/UnderstandingKaZaA.pdf.
  76. Liang, J., Kumar, R., and Ross, K. W. 2004b. The KaZaA Overlay: A Measurement Study. In Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Annual Computer Communications Workshop, 2004. Bonita Springs, Florida.
  77. Liang, J., Kumar, R., Xi, Y., and Ross, K. W. 2004. Pollution in P2P File Sharing Systems. http://cis.poly.edu/˜ross/papers/pollution.pdf.
  78. Löser, A., Naumann, F., Siberski, W., Nejdl, W., and Thaden, U. 2004. Semantic Overlay Clusters within Super-Peer Networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2944. Springer- Verlag GmbH, 33-47.
  79. Löser, A., Siberski, W., Wolpers, M., and Nejdl, W. 2003. Information integration in schema- based peer-to-peer networks. In Proceedings of Conference of Advanced Information Systems Engieering (CAiSE). 258-272.
  80. Lv, Q., Cao, P., Cohen, E., Li, K., and Shenker, S. 2002. Search and replication in unstruc- tured peer-to-peer networks. In ICS '02: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Supercomputing. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 84-95.
  81. M. Waldvogel, P. Hurley, D. B. 2003. Dynamic replica management in distributed hash tables. Tech. Rep. RZ 3502, IBM Technical Report.
  82. Madhavan, J. and Halevy, A. Y. 2003. Composing mappings among data sources. In Proceedings of the 29th VLDB Conference.
  83. Malkhi, D., Noar, M., and Ratajczak, D. 2002. Viceroy: A scalable and dynamic emulation of the butterfly. In Proceedings of Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC 2002). ACM Press.
  84. Maymounkov, P. and Mazieres, D. 2002. Kademlia: A peer-to-peer information system based on the xor metric. In 1st International Peer To Peer Systems Workshop (IPTPS 2002). ACM Press.
  85. McBrien, P. and Poulovassilis, A. 2004. Defining peer-to-peer data integration using both as view rules. Springer Verlag LNCS, 91-107.
  86. Muthitacharoen, A., Morris, R., Gil, T. M., and Chen, B. 2002. Ivy: a read/write peer-to- peer file system. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 36, SI, 31-44.
  87. My'zrak, A. T., Cheng, Y., Kumar, V., and Savage, S. 2003. Structured superpeers: Leveraging heterogeneity to provide constant-time lookup. In WIAPP '03: Proceedings of the The Third IEEE Workshop on Internet Applications. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 104. Napster 2001. Napster. http://www.napster.com/.
  88. Nejdl, W., Wolf, B., Qu, C., Decker, S., Sintek, M., Naeve, A., Nilsson, M., Palmér, M., and Risch, T. 2002a. Edutella: a p2p networking infrastructure based on rdf. In WWW '02: Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on World Wide Web. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 604-615.
  89. Nejdl, W., Wolf, B., Qu, C., Decker, S., Sintek, M., Naeve, A., Nilsson, M., Palmér, M., and Risch, T. 2002b. Edutella: a p2p networking infrastructure based on rdf. In WWW '02: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 604-615.
  90. Ng, W. S., Ooi, B. C., Tan, K.-L., and Zhou, A. 2003. Peerdb: A p2p-based system for distributed data sharing. In Intl. Conf. on Data Engineering (ICDE).
  91. Papadimos, V., Maier, D., and Tufte, K. 2003. Distributed Query Processing and Catalogs for Peer-to-Peer Systems. In Proceedings of Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR).
  92. Plaxton, C. G., Rajaraman, R., and Richa, A. W. 1997. Accessing nearby copies of replicated objects in a distributed environment. In SPAA '97: Proceedings of the ninth annual ACM symposium on Parallel algorithms and architectures. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 311- 320.
  93. Pouwelse, J., Garbacki, P., Epema, D., and Sips, H. 2005. The bittorrent p2p file-sharing system: Measurements and analysis. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS'05), Feb 2005.
  94. Pugh, W. 1990. Skip lists: a probabilistic alternative to balanced trees. Commun. ACM 33, 6, 668-676.
  95. Rahm, E. and Bernstein, P. A. 2001. A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB Journal 10, 4, 334-350.
  96. Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., and Karp, R. 2001. A scalable content-addressable network. In SIGCOMM '01: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications. ACM Press.
  97. Ritter, J. 2001. Why gnutella can't scale, no, really. http://www.darkridge.com/˜jpr5/doc/gnutella.html.
  98. Rohrs, C. 2002. Query routing for the gnutella network. Unpublished Work. Available at http://rfc-gnutella.sourceforge.net/src/qrp.html.
  99. Rowstron, A. and Druschel, P. 2001a. Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In "Proceedings of the 18th IFIP/ACM Int'l. Conf. Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware'01), LNCS 2218, 2001". ACM Press.
  100. Rowstron, A. and Druschel, P. 2001b. Storage management and caching in past, a large- scale, persistent peer-to-peer storage utility. In SOSP '01: Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 188-201.
  101. Sahin, O., Gupta, A., Agrawal, D., and Abbadi, A. 2002. Query Processing Over Peer-to-Peer Data Sharing Systems. Tech. rep., University of California at Santa Barbara.
  102. Sahin, O. D., Gupta, A., Agrawal, D., and Abbadi, A. E. 2004. A peer-to-peer framework for caching range queries. In ICDE '04: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Data Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 165.
  103. Sakaryan, G., Wulff, M., and Unger, H. 2004. Search methods in p2p networks: a survey. In I2CS-Innovative Internet Community Systems (I2CS 2004).
  104. Sandberg, R., Goldberg, D., Kleiman, S., Walsh, D., and Lyon, B. 1985. Design and imple- mentation of the Sun Network Filesystem. In Proceedings of Summer 1985 USENIX Confer- ence. Portland, OR, USA, 119-130.
  105. Saroiu, S., Gummadi, K. P., Dunn, R. J., Gribble, S. D., and Levy, H. M. 2002. An analysis of internet content delivery systems. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 36, SI, 315-327.
  106. Saroiu, S., Gummadi, P. K., and Gribble, S. D. 2002. A measurement study of peer-to-peer file sharing systems. In Proceedings of Multimedia Computing and Networking, 2002.
  107. Satyanarayanan, M., Kistler, J. J., Kumar, P., Okasaki, M. E., Siegel, E. H., and Steere, D. C. 1990. Coda: A highly available file system for a distributed workstation environment. IEEE Trans. Comput. 39, 4, 447-459.
  108. Stading, T., Maniatis, P., and Baker, M. 2002. Peer-to-peer caching schemes to address flash crowds. In IPTPS '01: Revised Papers from the First International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems. Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 203-213.
  109. Stoica, I., Adkins, D., Ratnasamy, S., Shenker, S., Surana, S., and Zhuang, S. 2002. In- ternet indirection infrastructure. In IPTPS '01: Revised Papers from the First International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems. Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 191-202.
  110. Stoica, I., Morris, R., Liben-Nowell, D., Karger, D., Kaashoek, M., Dabek, F., and Bal- akrishnan, H. 2001. Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications. In SIGCOMM '01: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Applications, technologies, architec- tures, and protocols for computer communications. ACM Press.
  111. Tatarinov, I., Ives, Z., amd, J., Halevy, A., Suciu, D., Dalvi, N., Dong, X., Kadiyaska, Y., Miklau, G., and Mork, P. 2003. The piazza peer data management project. ACM SIGMOD Record 32, 3.
  112. Triantafillou, P. and Pitoura, T. 2003. Towards a unifying framework for complex query processing over structured peer-to-peer data networks. In DBISP2P, K. Aberer, V. Kalogeraki, and M. Koubarakis, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2944. Springer, 169-183.
  113. Tsoumakos, D. and Roussopoulos, N. 2003. Adaptive probabilistic search for peer-to-peer networks. In P2P '03: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Com- puting. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 102.
  114. Ullman, J. D. 1997. Information integration using logical views. In Proceedings of the 6th Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT-97). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 19-40. Springer-Verlag, 1997.
  115. Valduriez, P. and Pacitti, E. 2004. Data management in large-scale p2p systems. In Proceedings 6th Int. Conf. on High Performance Computing in Computational Sciences (VECPAR).
  116. W3C 2001. World wide web consortium semantic web activities. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw.
  117. Wiederhold, G. 1992. Mediators in the architecture of future information systems. Com- puter 25, 3, 38-49.
  118. Wolpert, D. H. 1992. Stacked generalization. Neural Networks 5, 241-259. University of Waterloo Technical Report CS-2006-18

Related papers

A Model for Data Management in Peer-to-Peer Systems
Francis Otto

2007

Hope University, UK _____________________________________________________________ With the current growth in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing, data management in P2P systems has become a very important issue, yet from literature little research effort has been dedicated to this field. Data management in P2P systems covers a wide range of issues starting from storage and indexing, replication and search to security and privacy. In this paper we propose a modularized data management model for P2P systems that cleanly separates the functional components, enabling the implementation of various P2P services with specific quality of service requirements using a common infrastructure besides improving the data management in the P2P system. We present the potential applications that could exploit the advantages our model provides.

View PDFchevron_right
A Peer-to-Peer Reference Architecture
Atul Singh

2006 1st International Conference on Communication Systems Software & Middleware

Peer-to-Peer (P2P) applications are extremely popular on the Internet because they allow users to share information in a decentralised manner. Internet users use file-sharing applications (e.g., BitTorrent, KaZaA) to share and exchange files and collaboration applications (e.g., Jabber, Groove) to exchange chat messages and work on shared documents. A reference architecture for a domain provides an architecture template which can be used as a starting point for designing the software architecture of a system in that domain. Despite the popularity of P2P applications there is no reference architecture for the P2P domain. This paper presents a reference architecture for the P2P domain. The reference architecture has been designed to satisfy the concerns that a P2P application needs to address. The reference architecture takes a service-centric view of the P2P domain. The reference architecture can be used to describe the structure of existing P2P applications and middlewares. The paper validates the reference architecture by describing the structure of some of the existing P2P applications and middlewares using the reference architecture.

View PDFchevron_right
A conceptual model for data management and distribution in peer-to-peer systems
Ali Bicak

Peer-to-Peer Networking …, 2010

While Peer-to-Peer (P2P) model gains significant attention in distributed computing, it is also expected to be a powerful model for information sharing. P2P systems are expected to provide exhaustive reliable computational resources and scalable accessibility. The data management and distribution in such systems requires storage, replication, data modeling, indexing, querying, retrieval, streaming, and topology management. While a lot of data management strategies have been proposed through the last years, these strategies have not been investigated with respect to a common model for P2P systems. However, since the services provided by the P2P systems are so diverse, it is very challenging to come up with a common layer-based model for all P2P systems. In this paper, we firstly propose a conceptual model for P2P systems, and then provide a classification and summary of data management and distribution strategies by referring to this model. The horizontal layers of the model correspond to modules of a P2P system whereas the columns are related to the services provided. The modules include base P2P service, storage, indexing, logical, service, and application modules. The services include security, querying, publish, join/leave, collaboration, and streaming. The paper concludes by providing a comprehensive list of data management and distribution strategies used in the existing P2P systems.

View PDFchevron_right
Data Sharing in P2P Systems
Guillaume Raschia

Handbook of Peer-to-Peer Networking, 2009

In this chapter, we survey P2P data sharing systems. All along, we focus on the evolution from simple file-sharing systems, with limited functionalities, to Peer Data Management Systems (PDMS) that support advanced applications with more sophisticated data management techniques. Advanced P2P applications are dealing with semantically rich data (e.g. XML documents, relational tables), using a high-level SQL-like query language. We start our survey with an overview over the existing P2P network architectures, and the associated routing protocols. Then, we discuss data indexing techniques based on their distribution degree and the semantics they can capture from the underlying data. We also discuss schema management techniques which allow integrating heterogeneous data. We conclude by discussing the techniques proposed for processing complex queries (e.g. range and join queries). Complex query facilities are necessary for advanced applications which require a high level of search expressiveness. This last part shows the lack of querying techniques that allow for an approximate query answering.

View PDFchevron_right
A dynamic framework for integrated management of all types of resources in P2P systems
Mohsen Sharifi

The Journal of Supercomputing, 2009

Traditional Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems were restricted to sharing of files on the Internet. Although some of the more recent P2P distributed systems have tried to support transparent sharing of other types of resources, like computer processing power, but none allow and support sharing of all types of resources available on the Internet. This is mainly because the resource management part of P2P systems are custom designed in support of specific features of only one type of resource, making simultaneous access to all types of resources impractical. Another shortcoming of existing P2P systems is that they follow a client/server model of resource sharing that makes them structurally constrained and dependent on dedicated servers (resource managers). Clients must get permission from a limited number of servers to share or access resources, and resource management mechanisms run on these servers. Because resource management by servers is not dynamically reconfigurable, such P2P systems are not scalable to the ever growing extent of Internet. We present an integrated framework for sharing of all types of resources in P2P systems by using a dynamic structure for managing four basic types of resources, namely process, file, memory, and I/O, in the same way they are routinely managed by operating systems. The proposed framework allows P2P systems to use dynamically reconfigurable resource management mechanisms where each machine in the P2P system can at the same time serve both as a server and as a client. The pattern of requests for shared resources at a given time identifies which machines are currently servers and which ones are currently clients. The client server pattern changes with changes in the pattern of requests for distributed resources. Scalable P2P systems with dynamically M. Sharifi ( ) • S.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • File Sharing
  • Data Integrity
  • Reference Architecture
  • Data Consistency
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved