REDUCING FRAGMENTATION FOR IN-LINE

DUPLICATION BACKUP STORAGE VIA EXPLOITING

BACKUP HISTORY AN CACHE KNOWLEDGE

ABSTRACT:
In this paper, backup systems the chunks of each backup are physically scattered after de-
duplication which causes a challenging fragmentation problem. Observe that the fragmentation
comes into sparse and out of order containers. The sparse container decreases restore
performance and garbage collection efficiency while the out of order container decreases
restore performance if the restore cache is small. In order to reduce the fragmentation. We
propose History-Aware Rewriting algorithm and Cache-Aware Filter.

History-Aware Rewriting exploits historical information in backup systems to accurately

identify and reduce sparse containers and Cache-Aware Filter exploits restore cache knowledge
to identify the out of order containers that hurt restore performance. Observe that the
fragmentation comes into sparse and out of order containers. Backup storage systems typically
take away redundancy across backups via inline deduplication that works by referring duplicate
chunks of the newest backup to those of existing backups. Inline deduplication reduces restore
performance of the newest backup owing to fragmentation and complicates deletion of
terminated backups owing to the sharing of knowledge chunks. Cache-Aware Filter efficiently
complements History-Aware Rewriting in datasets were out of order containers are dominant.
To reduce the metadata overhead of the garbage collection. We further propose a Container-
Marker Algorithm to identify valid containers instead of valid chunks. Our extensive
experimental results from real-world datasets show History-Aware Rewriting significantly.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER NO TITLE PAGE NO

I. ABSTRACT I
II. LIST OF FIGURES II
III. LIST OF SYMBOLS VI
IV. LIST OF ABBREVIATION IX
V. LIST OF TABELS X

1. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-4

1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 OBJECTIVES
1.3 EXISTING SYSTEM
1.4 LITERATURE SURVEY
1.5 PROPOSED SYSTEM
2. CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5-9
2.1 GENERAL
2.2 PROBLEM DEFINATION
2.3 METHODOLOGIES
2.3.1 MODULES NAME
2.3.2 MODULES DESCRIPTIONS
2.3.3 MODULES DIAGRAM
2.3.4 GIVEN INPUT AND EXPECTED OUTPUT
2.4 TECHNIQUE OR ALGORITHM
3. CHAPTER 3: REQUIREMENTS 10-11
3.1 GENERAL
3.2 HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS
3.3 SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS
3.4 FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATIONS
3.5 NON FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATIONS

ii
4. CHAPTER 4: SYSTEM DESIGN 12-23
4.1 GENERAL
4.1.1 ACTIVITY DIAGRAM
4.1.2 USE CASE DIAGRAM
4.1.3 DATA FLOW DIAGRAM
4.1.4 SEQUENCE DIAGRAM
4.1.5 COLLABORATION DIAGRAM
4.1.6 CLASS DIAGRAM
4.1.7 SYTEM ARCHITECTURE
4.1.8 OBJECT DIAGRAM
4.1.9 STATE DIAGRAM
4.1.10 COMPONENT DIAGRAM
4.1.11 E-R DIAGRAM
5. CHAPTER 5: SOFTWARE SPECIFICATION 24-50
5.1 GENERAL
5.2 DOTNET
5.2.1 INTRODUCTION TO DOTNET
5.2.2 THE DOTNET FRAMEWORK
5.2.3 MANAGE CODE
5.2.4 MANAGE DATA
5.2.5 COMMON TYPE SYSTEM(CTS)
5.2.6 COMMON LANGUAGE SPECIFICATION
5.2.7 THE CLASS LIBRARY
5.3 FEATURES OF C#
5.4 OBJECTIVE OF C#
5.5 COMPOENTS OF .NET FRAMEWORK
5.6 ASP.NET OVERVIEW
5.6.1 ASP.NET ARCHITECTURE
5.6.2 ASP.NET PAGE LIFE CYCLE
5.7 SQL SERVER
5.7.1 FEATURES OF SQL

iii
6. CHAPTER 6: IMPLEMENTATION 51-79
6.1 GENERAL
6.2 IMPLEMENTATION
6.3 DATA BASE TABLE STRUCTURE
7. CHAPTER 7: SNAPSHOTS 80-92
7.1 GENERAL
7.2 VARIOUS SNAPSHOTS
8. CHAPTER 8: SOFTWARE TESTING 93-95
8.1 GENERAL
8.2 DEVELOPING METHODOLOGIES
8.3 TYPES OF TESTING
9. CHAPTER 9: APPLICATIONS 96
9.1 GENERAL
9.2 APPLICATION
9.3 FUTURE ENHANCEMENT
10. CHAPTER 10: CONCLUSION 97
10.1 CONCLUSION
10.2 REFERENCES

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO NAME OF THE FIGURE PAGE NO.

2.3.3 MODULE DIAGRAM 6
4.1.1 ACTIVITY DIAGRAM 12
4.1.2 USE CASE DIAGRAM 13
4.1.3 DATA FLOW DIAGRAM 14
4.1.4 SEQUENCE DIAGRAM 16
4.1.5 COLLABORATION DIAGRAM 17
4.1.6 CLASS DIAGRAM 18
4.1.7 SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE 19
4.1.8 OBJECT DIAGRAM 20
4.1.9 STATE DIAGRAM 21
4.1.10 COMPONENT DIAGRAM 22
4.1.11 E-R DIAGRAM 23

v
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

S.no NOTATION NAME NOTATION DESCRIPTION

1. Class Represents a collection of
Class Name similar entities grouped
+ public
together.
-attribute
-private
-attribute
# protected

+operation
2. Association Association represents static
Relationship between classes.
Class A NAME+operation
Class B Roles represents the way two
+operation classes see each other.

Class A Class B

3. Actor It aggregates several classes

into a single classes.

4. Relation Used for additional process

(uses) Uses Communication

5. Aggregation Interaction between the system

Class A Class A

Class B Class B

6. Relation Initial state of the object

(extends)

extends

vi
7. Communication Communication between
various use cases.

8. State State of the process

State

9. Initial State Represents the Initial state of

the object

10. Final state Represents the final state of the

object

11. Control flow Represents various control flow

between the states.

12. Decision box Represents decision making

process from a constraint

13. Use case Interaction between the system

and external environment.

Use case

vii
14. Component Represents physical modules
which are a collection of
components.

15. Node Represents physical modules

which are a collection of c
components

16. Data Process/State A circle in DFD represents a

state or process which has been
triggered due to some event or
action.

17. External entity Represents external entities

such as keyboard, sensors.

18. Transition Represents communication that

occurs between processes.

19. Object Lifeline Represents the dimensions and

Object communications.

20. Message Represents the message that are

Exchanged.
Message

viii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

S.NO ABBREVIATION EXPANSION

1 HAR History Aware Rewriting

2 CAF Cache Aware Filter

3 HCL Hardware Compatibility List

4 BO Business Objects

5 BAL Business Access Layer

6 DAL Data Access Layer

ix
LIST OF TABLES

S.NO NAME OF THE TABLE PAGE NO

1 User details 6

2 File upload 6

3 Admin login 7