@Article{gibson:nasd-scaling,
  author = {Garth A. Gibson and David F. Nagle and Khalil Amiri and Fay W.
  Chang and Eugene M. Feinberg and Howard Gobioff and Chen Lee and Berend
  Ozceri and Erik Riedel and David Rochberg and Jim Zelenka},
  title = {File server scaling with network-attached secure disks.},
  journal = {Performance Evaluation Review},
  booktitle = {1997 ACM International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of
  Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS 97), 15-18 June 1997, Seattle, WA, USA},
  year = {1997},
  volume = {25},
  number = {1},
  pages = {272 -- 84},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  copyright = {(c)2004 IEE},
  URL = {http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/PDL-FTP/NASD/Sigmetrics97.pdf},
  keywords = {NASD, network-attached disks, distributed file system, parallel
  file system, security, secure disks, pario-bib},
  abstract = {By providing direct data transfer between storage and client,
  network-attached storage devices have the potential to improve scalability
  for existing distributed file systems (by removing the server as a
  bottleneck) and bandwidth for new parallel and distributed file systems
  (through network striping and more efficient data paths). Together, these
  advantages influence a large enough fraction of the storage market to make
  commodity network-attached storage feasible. Realizing the technology's full
  potential requires careful consideration across a wide range of file system,
  networking and security issues. This paper contrasts two network-attached
  storage architectures-(1) Networked SCSI disks (NetSCSI) are network attached
  storage devices with minimal changes from the familiar SCSI interface, while
  (2) Network-Attached Secure Disks (NASD) are drives that support independent
  client access to drive object services. To estimate the potential performance
  benefits of these architectures, we develop an analytic model and perform
  trace-driven replay experiments based on AFS and NFS traces. Our results
  suggest that NetSCSI can reduce file server load during a burst of NFS or AFS
  activity by about 30%. With the NASD architecture, server load (during burst
  activity) can be reduced by a factor of up to five for AFS and up to ten for
  NFS.},
  comment = {Essentially, the conference (and subsequent) journal version of
  gibson:nasd-tr. The studies that use simple analytical models (based on
  measured workloads of NFS and AFS file managers) to compare performance of
  NASD to SAD (storage-attached disks) and NetSCSI are often cited as
  justification for the NASD and object-based storage approaches.}
}