2017
DOI: 10.1109/tmc.2016.2610978
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal Device-Aware Caching

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, using a Markov decision process, Bahat and Makowski proved that the optimal content replacement policy is a Markov stationary policy under the independent reference model [44]. In their recent work, Shukla and Abouzeid modeled content replacement using a Markov decision process and found the optimal content retention time to jointly minimize content retrieval delay and cache wearout [45]. Our focus here, however, is the design of content replacement that can converge to a target stationary point in the case when the instantaneous content popularity is time-invariant and adapt to the variations in the case when the instantaneous content popularity is time-varying.…”
Section: The Content Replacement Markov Chainmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, using a Markov decision process, Bahat and Makowski proved that the optimal content replacement policy is a Markov stationary policy under the independent reference model [44]. In their recent work, Shukla and Abouzeid modeled content replacement using a Markov decision process and found the optimal content retention time to jointly minimize content retrieval delay and cache wearout [45]. Our focus here, however, is the design of content replacement that can converge to a target stationary point in the case when the instantaneous content popularity is time-invariant and adapt to the variations in the case when the instantaneous content popularity is time-varying.…”
Section: The Content Replacement Markov Chainmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only prior lower bound is an infinitely large cache [24,1,48], which is very conservative and gives no sense of how OPT changes at different cache sizes. Belady variants (e.g., Belady-Size in Section 2.4) are widely used as an upper bound [48,61,46,77], despite offering no guarantees of optimality. While these offline bounds are easy to compute, we will show that they are in fact far from OPT.…”
Section: The Problem: Finding the Offline Optimalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Denote by f (t) the storage cost due to storing a content in a helper's cache in slot t. A longer retention time needs a higher threshold voltage, which results in a higher memory damage and consequently gives a higher storage cost, for more detailed discussions, see [2]. Motivated by this, we assume that f (t) is an increasing function.…”
Section: B Cost Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, storing a content may be subject to a cost as well. A storage cost may be due to flash rental cost incurred by cloud service providers or flash damage caused by writing a content to the memory device [2]. In both cases, the storage cost typically depends on the time duration of storage, hereafter referred to as the retention time.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%