Research

Cloud-based financial exchanges require sub-10ns device-to-device clock synchronization accuracy while adhering to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Existing clock sync techniques struggle to meet this demand at scale and are vulnerable to clock drift, jitter, and path asymmetries. Firefly, a software-driven datacenter clock sync system, scalably, cost-effectively, and reliably achieves very high clock sync accuracy. It employs a distributed consensus algorithm on a random overlay graph to rapidly converge to a common time while applying gradual adjustments to device hardware clocks. To realize consistent sync-to-UTC (external sync) across devices while maintaining a stable device-to-device internal sync, Firefly uses a novel technique, layered synchronization, that decouples internal and external syncs. In a 248-machine Clos network, Firefly achieves sub-10ns device-to-device and ≤1μs device-to-UTC sync, and is resilient to time server failure and unstable clocks.

Today, large-scale software-defined networks use microservice-based controllers. Bugs in these controllers can reduce network availability by making the data plane state inconsistent with the high-level intent. To recover from such inconsistencies, modern controllers periodically reconcile the state of all the switches with the desired intent. However, periodic reconciliation limits the availability and performance of the network at scale. We introduce Zenith, a microservice-based controller that avoids inconsistencies by design rather than always relying on recovery mechanisms. We have formally verified Zenith’s specifications and have proved that it ensures the network state will eventually be consistent with intent. We automatically generate Zenith’s code from its specification to minimize the likelihood of errors in the final implementation. Zenith’s guarantees and abstractions also enable developers to independently verify SDN applications and ensure end-to-end safety and correctness. Zenith resolves inconsistencies 5\texttimes faster than today’s designs and significantly improves availability.

We consider the max-min fair resource allocation problem. The best-known solutions use either a sequence of optimizations or waterfilling, which only applies to a narrow set of cases. These solutions have become a practical bottleneck in WAN traffic engineering and cluster scheduling, especially at larger problem sizes. We improve both approaches: (1) we show how to convert the optimization sequence into a single fast optimization, and (2) we generalize waterfilling to the multi-path case. We empirically show our new algorithms Pareto-dominate prior techniques: they produce faster, fairer, and more efficient allocations. Some of our allocators also have theoretical guarantees: they trade off a bounded amount of unfairness for faster allocation. We have deployed our allocators in Azure’s WAN traffic engineering pipeline, where we preserve solution quality and achieve a roughly 3× speedup.

Production systems use heuristics because they are faster or scale better than their optimal counterparts. Yet, practitioners are often unaware of the performance gap between a heuristic and the optimum or between two heuristics in realistic scenarios. We present MetaOpt, a system that helps analyze heuristics. Users specify the heuristic and the optimal (or another heuristic) as input, and MetaOpt automatically encodes these efficiently for a solver to find performance gaps and their corresponding adversarial inputs. Its suite of built-in optimizations helps it scale its analysis to practical problem sizes. To show it is versatile, we used MetaOpt to analyze heuristics from three domains (traffic engineering, vector bin packing, and packet scheduling). We found a production traffic engineering heuristic can require 30% more capacity than the optimal to satisfy realistic demands. Based on the patterns in the adversarial inputs MetaOpt produced, we modified the heuristic to reduce its performance gap by 12.5×. We examined adversarial inputs to a vector bin packing heuristic and proved a new lower bound on its performance.

While prior work has explored many proposed datacenter designs, only two designs, Clos-based and expander-based, are generally considered practical because they can scale using commodity switching chips. Prior work has used two different metrics, bisection bandwidth and throughput, for evaluating these topologies at scale. Little is known, theoretically or practically, how these metrics relate to each other. Exploiting characteristics of these topologies, we prove an upper bound on their throughput, then show that this upper bound better estimates worst-case throughput than all previously proposed throughput estimators and scales better than most of them. Using this upper bound, we show that for expander-based topologies, unlike Clos, beyond a certain size of the network, no topology can have full throughput, even if it has full bisection bandwidth; in fact, even relatively small expander-based topologies fail to achieve full throughput. We conclude by showing that using throughput to evaluate datacenter performance instead of bisection bandwidth can alter conclusions in prior work about datacenter cost, manageability, and reliability.