Subhadeep Sarkar

Data-intensive applications have fueled the evolution of log-structured merge (LSM) based key-value engines that employ the out-of-place paradigm to support high ingestion rates with low read/write interference. These benefits, however, come at the cost of treating deletes as second-class citizens. A delete operation inserts a tombstone that invalidates older instances of the deleted key. State-of-the-art LSM-engines do not provide guarantees as to how fast a tombstone will propagate to persist the deletion.
Further, LSM-engines only support deletion on the sort key. To delete on another attribute (e.g., timestamp), the entire tree is read and re-written, leading to undesired latency spikes and increasing the overall operational cost of a database. Efficient and persistent deletion is key to support: (i) streaming systems operating on a window of data, (ii) privacy with latency guarantees on data deletion, and (iii) en masse cloud deployment of data systems. Further, we document that LSM-based key-value engines perform suboptimally in presence of deletes in a workload. Tombstone-driven logical deletes, by design, are unable to purge the deleted entries in a timely manner, and retaining the invalidated entries perpetually affects the overall performance of LSM-engines in terms of space amplification, write amplification, and read performance. Moreover, the potentially unbounded latency for persistent deletes brings in critical privacy concerns in light of the data privacy protection regulations, such as the right to be forgotten in EU’s GDPR, the right to delete in California’s CCPA and CPRA, and deletion right in Virginia’s VCDPA. Toward this, we introduce the delete design space for LSM-trees and highlight the performance implications of the different classes of delete operations.
To address these challenges, in this article, we build a new key-value storage engine, Lethe+, that uses a very small amount of additional metadata, a set of new delete-aware compaction policies, and a new physical data layout that weaves the sort and the delete key order. We show that Lethe+ supports any user-defined threshold for the delete persistence latency offering higher read throughput (1.17x-1.4x) and lower space amplification (2.1x-9.8x), with a modest increase in write amplification (between 4% and 25%) that can be further amortized to less than 1%. In addition, Lethe+ supports efficient range deletes on a secondary delete key by dropping entire data pages without sacrificing read performance or employing a costly full tree merge.

Log-structured merge (LSM) trees have emerged as one of the most commonly used storage-based data structures in modern data systems as they offer high throughput for writes and good utilization of storage space. However, LSM-trees were not originally designed to facilitate efficient reads. Thus, state-of-the-art LSM engines employ numerous optimization techniques to make reads efficient. The goal of this tutorial is to present the fundamental principles of the LSM paradigm along with the various optimization techniques and hybrid designs adopted by LSM engines to accelerate reads.
Toward this, we first discuss the basic LSM operations and their access patterns. We then discuss techniques and designs that optimize point and range lookups in LSM-trees: (i) index and (ii) filter data structures, (iii) caching, and (iv) read- friendly data layouts. Next, we present the performance tradeoff between writes and reads, outlining the rich design space of the LSM paradigm and how one can navigate it to improve query performance. We conclude by discussing practical problems and open research challenges. This will be a 1.5-hour tutorial.

Log-structured merge (LSM) trees are widely used as the storage layer of production NoSQL data stores, as they offer efficient ingestion performance. To enable competitive read performance and reduce space amplification, LSM-trees periodically re-organize data layout on disk iteratively, through compactions. Compactions are at the heart of every LSM-based storage engine, fundamentally influencing their performance in terms of write amplification, write throughput, point and range lookup performance, space amplification, and delete performance. However, the process of compaction in LSM-engines is often treated as a black-box that is rarely exposed as a tuning knob. In this paper, we demonstrate Compactionary, a dictionary for LSM compactions, outlining the implications of compactions on performance, and how different LSM tunings and workloads influence compactions.
Compactionary breaks down the LSM compaction black-box, expressing compactions as an ensemble of four first-order design choices: (i) when to compact, (ii) how to organize the data after compaction, (iii) how much data to compact, and (iv) which data to compact. We configure Compactionary to demonstrate the operational flow of a family of state-of-the-art LSM compaction strategies and how each strategy influences the performance of the storage engine. The participants can (i) customize the workload, (ii) configure the LSM tuning, and (iii) switch between advanced compaction options, to understand individually the impacts of the different factors on performance. Further, to engage the interested participants, we extend the demonstration by allowing the participants (i) to create custom hybrid compaction strategies, as well as (ii) to configure the settings separately for each strategy in an individual analysis phase. The demo is available at https://disc-projects.bu.edu/compactionary/#interactiveDemo.

Log-structured merge (LSM) trees have emerged as one of the most commonly used disk-based data structures in modern data systems. LSM-trees employ out-of-place ingestion to support high throughput for writes, while their immutable file structure allows for good utilization of disk space. Thus, the log-structured paradigm has been widely adopted in state-of-the-art NoSQL, relational, spatial, and time-series data systems. However, despite their popularity, there is a lack of pedagogical textbook-like material on LSM designs. The goal of this tutorial is to present the fundamental principles of the LSM paradigm along with a digest of optimizations and new designs proposed in recent research and adopted by modern LSM engines. This will serve as introductory material for non-experts, and as a roadmap to cutting-edge LSM results for the LSM-aware researchers and practitioners.
Toward this, we first discuss in detail the basic operations (inserts, updates, deletes, point and range queries), their access patterns and their paths through the LSM data structure. We then dive into the details of recent research on optimizing each of those operations. We first discuss techniques and designs that optimize data ingestion, and then, we discuss new data structures that optimize read queries. Finally, we present the rich design space of the log-structured paradigm and outline how to navigate it and tune LSM-based systems. We conclude with a discussion on open challenges on LSM systems. This will be a 1.5-hour tutorial.

Log-structured merge (LSM) trees offer efficient ingestion by appending incoming data, and thus, are widely used as the storage layer of production NoSQL data stores. To enable competitive read performance, LSM-trees periodically re-organize data to form a tree with levels of exponentially increasing capacity, through iterative compactions. Compactions fundamentally influence the performance of an LSM-engine in terms of write amplification, write throughput, point and range lookup performance, space amplification, and delete performance. Hence, choosing the appropriate compaction strategy is crucial and, at the same time, hard as the LSM compaction design space is vast, largely unexplored, and has not been formally defined in the literature. As a result, most LSM-based engines use a fixed compaction strategy, typically hand-picked by an engineer, which decides how and when to compact data.
In this paper, we present the design space of LSM-compactions, and evaluate state-of-the-art compaction strategies with respect to key performance metrics. Toward this goal, our first contribution is to introduce a set of four design primitives that can formally define any compaction strategy: (i) the compaction trigger, (ii) the data layout, (iii) the compaction granularity, and (iv) the data movement policy. Together, these primitives can synthesize both existing and completely new compaction strategies. Our second contribution is to experimentally analyze 10 compaction strategies. We present 12 observations and 7 high-level takeaway messages, which show how LSM systems can navigate the compaction design space.

Data-intensive applications fueled the evolution of log structured merge (LSM) based key-value engines that employ the out-of-place paradigm to support high ingestion rates with low read/write interference. These benefits, however, come at the cost of treating deletes as a second-class citizen. A delete inserts a tombstone that invalidates older instances of the deleted key. State-of-the-art LSM engines do not provide guarantees as to how fast a tombstone will propagate to persist the deletion. Further, LSM engines only support deletion on the sort key. To delete on another attribute (e.g., timestamp), the entire tree is read and re-written. We highlight that fast persistent deletion without affecting read performance is key to support: (i) streaming systems operating on a window of data, (ii) privacy with latency guarantees on the right-to-be-forgotten, and (iii) en masse cloud deployment of data systems that makes storage a precious resource.
To address these challenges, in this paper, we build a new key-value storage engine, Lethe, that uses a very small amount of additional metadata, a set of new delete-aware compaction policies, and a new physical data layout that weaves the sort and the delete key order. We show that Lethe supports any user-defined threshold for the delete persistence latency offering higher read throughput (1.17-1.4x) and lower space amplification (2.1-9.8x), with a modest increase in write amplification (between 4% and 25%). In addition, Lethe supports efficient range deletes on a secondary delete key by dropping entire data pages without sacrificing read performance nor employing a costly full tree merge.