Paper detail

Optimal Rebuilding of Multiple Erasures in MDS Codes

MDS array codes are widely used in storage systems due to their computationally efficient encoding and decoding procedures. An MDS code with $r$ redundancy nodes can correct any $r$ node erasures by accessing all the remaining information in the surviving nodes. However, in practice, $e$ erasures is a more likely failure event, for $1\le e<r$. Hence, a natural question is how much information do we need to access in order to rebuild $e$ storage nodes? We define the rebuilding ratio as the fraction of remaining information accessed during the rebuilding of $e$ erasures. In our previous work we constructed MDS codes, called zigzag codes, that achieve the optimal rebuilding ratio of $1/r$ for the rebuilding of any systematic node when $e=1$, however, all the information needs to be accessed for the rebuilding of the parity node erasure. The (normalized) repair bandwidth is defined as the fraction of information transmitted from the remaining nodes during the rebuilding process. For codes that are not necessarily MDS, Dimakis et al. proposed the regenerating codes framework where any $r$ erasures can be corrected by accessing some of the remaining information, and any $e=1$ erasure can be rebuilt from some subsets of surviving nodes with optimal repair bandwidth. In this work, we study 3 questions on rebuilding of codes: (i) We show a fundamental trade-off between the storage size of the node and the repair bandwidth similar to the regenerating codes framework, and show that zigzag codes achieve the optimal rebuilding ratio of $e/r$ for MDS codes, for any $1\le e\le r$. (ii) We construct systematic codes that achieve optimal rebuilding ratio of $1/r$, for any systematic or parity node erasure. (iii) We present error correction algorithms for zigzag codes, and in particular demonstrate how these codes can be corrected beyond their minimum Hamming distances.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.