Access vs. Bandwidth in Codes for Storage

TL;DR

This paper investigates the limits of MDS codes in storage systems, focusing on the relationship between node capacity, code parameters, and optimal repair bandwidth or access, revealing that these measures are not always equivalent.

Contribution

It provides upper bounds for the maximum number of information disks in optimal bandwidth and access MDS codes with constant parity, highlighting differences between these two repair measures.

Findings

Derived upper bounds for general cases.

Established tight bounds for specific code families.

Showed that optimal bandwidth and access codes can differ in maximum size.

Abstract

Maximum distance separable (MDS) codes are widely used in storage systems to protect against disk (node) failures. A node is said to have capacity $l$ over some field $\mathbb{F}$, if it can store that amount of symbols of the field. An $(n,k,l)$ MDS code uses $n$ nodes of capacity $l$ to store $k$ information nodes. The MDS property guarantees the resiliency to any $n-k$ node failures. An \emph{optimal bandwidth} (resp. \emph{optimal access}) MDS code communicates (resp. accesses) the minimum amount of data during the repair process of a single failed node. It was shown that this amount equals a fraction of $1/(n-k)$ of data stored in each node. In previous optimal bandwidth constructions, $l$ scaled polynomially with $k$ in codes with asymptotic rate $<1$. Moreover, in constructions with a constant number of parities, i.e. rate approaches 1, $l$ is scaled exponentially w.r.t. $k$. In this paper, we focus on the later case of constant number of parities $n-k=r$, and ask the following question: Given the capacity of a node $l$ what is the largest number of information disks $k$ in an optimal bandwidth (resp. access) $(k+r,k,l)$ MDS code. We give an upper bound for the general case, and two tight bounds in the special cases of two important families of codes. Moreover, the bounds show that in some cases optimal-bandwidth code has larger $k$ than optimal-access code, and therefore these two measures are not equivalent.