Labrinidis, A. and Roussopoulos, N. (2003). Balancing performance and data freshness in web database servers. In Proc. VLDB 2003, pp. 393–404. DOI 10.1016/B978-012722442-8/50042-2
Key takeaways
Read in full (NOTE-911). The paper poses Online View Selection for a web server whose database takes updates while serving requests: choose, as the workload runs, which page fragments (WebViews) to keep stored and refreshed on every update and which to cache and invalidate, so as to minimize mean response time while the fraction of fresh fragments served (QoD) stays above a threshold θ. Its algorithm, OVIS(θ), estimates per fragment the response-time and QoD change of switching, and periodically switches up to MAX_CHANGE fragments greedily, spending a QoD surplus on speed or buying back a deficit; it materializes everything when it detects backlog. Nothing is proved: optimality of the greedy step is asserted, and the evidence is one synthetic simulation with fixed costs, in which OVIS kept QoD near θ, answered faster than caching alone, and recovered from overload. Upkeep and query savings share one cost, but staleness is a constraint set by the user, not a priced term, and build cost, switching cost and storage are absent.
Why this is here
QUESTION-114: switches page fragments between cached and materialized to minimize response time subject to a freshness threshold the application sets. It puts query savings, upkeep and measured staleness on one online schedule, but staleness is a constraint, not a price, and there is no build cost or guarantee. Named when registered as the nearest candidate to the joint model; the reading found it is not that model.