Comparing the Reed Solomon Code to Two Recently Found Codes for Distributed Storage

Bachelor thesis (2019)

Authors

J. van der Krogt Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science

Contributors

J.H. Weber Discrete Mathematics and Optimization - (mentor)

Jos Weber Discrete Mathematics and Optimization - (mentor)

J.L.A. Dubbeldam Mathematical Physics - (graduation committee member)

J.G. Spandaw Analysis - (graduation committee member)

Faculty

Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science

To reference this document use:

http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:beb59701-5506-45a3-8dd7-7d38465342ab

More Info

expand_more

Published Date

13-03-2019

Language

English

Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Faculty

Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science

Abstract

Erasure codes protect data from being lost as servers tend to fail because of various reasons. Currently Reed Solomon Codes are being used by multiple big companies, however, more promising codes have been described in recent articles. This report compares the (14,10)-RS code (which is among others being used by Facebook), the Piggybacked (14,10)-RS code and the HeptagonLocal Code in terms of storage overhead, reliability and the repair bandwidth. As with most coding methods, most of the times a trade-off is found between the methods. The HeptagonLocal Code has the greatest storage overhead, however, it can repair one failed server, much faster then the other methods.

Files

Thesis.pdf

(pdf | 0.56 Mb)

Unknown license