[Hotstorage-chairs] [HotStorage 2026] Accepted submission #50 "io.stream: cgroup-Granular FDP for..."

Sat Aug 1 09:15:10 EDT 2026

Dear Suho,

First off, congratulations on your paper's acceptance to HotStorage.

Yes, we expect one or more authors to travel to the workshop and present their work orally. The final program (schedule of the workshop) is to be determined, and we will later share more details on the length of the presentation.

Thank you, and we look forward to learning more about your work at the workshop.
-Bryan S. Kim

________________________________
From: Hotstorage-chairs <hotstorage-chairs-bounces at fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> on behalf of 손수호 via Hotstorage-chairs <hotstorage-chairs at fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2026 22:08
To: chairs26 at hotstorage.org <chairs26 at hotstorage.org>
Cc: Suho Son <suho.son at samsung.com>; Kiyoung Ki <kiyoung77.lee at samsung.com>; Jinheon Kim <jinheon09.kim at samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [Hotstorage-chairs] [HotStorage 2026] Accepted submission #50 "https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,9j03G1Rqo5X0qzvQpoF12uPG3b89xh2TDV-FllL1KXj09ooA98LqVHN1Y07gi-Q4iXePCSGUv-24PQEqU1CB-XMxL9O-BMrql-eSub70VMN-dA,,&typo=1: cgroup-Granular FDP for..."

Dear HotStorage 2026 Program Chairs,

Thank you for the constructive reviews for our submission, #50. We will address the feedback in our camera-ready version by the August 12 deadline.

Regarding the presentation format, our company policy only funds travel for oral presentations. Could you please confirm if our accepted paper will be presented as an oral presentation?

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Best regards,

Suho Son

2026년 7월 25일 (토) 오전 11:58, HotStorage 2026 HotCRP <noreply-hotstorage26 at hotcrp.com<mailto:noreply-hotstorage26 at hotcrp.com>>님이 작성:
Dear authors,

The program committee for the 2026 ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Storage
and File Systems (HotStorage 2026) is delighted to inform you that your
submission #50 has been accepted to appear in the workshop.

* Title: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,dt_2U8UR5J2gfvj9zl5FqKuvWoA0FluJVrBe5lp62kqdQKJmxechRVmpAVBAeVKQpzMq1V-xD1-DpVx8rcpfAbH-uka2Ae2arM8yaR95n69txchehDahV7-qLA,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,FN2vL2tXxHzeMmPcieUVsaNzqb79gCx_-D_4fJuj7nEmFi-MKXazEmwZD6u5fBNMiFDjc4zeKgcQuAGEWK8Y1rwgfs0oFxRXXP6ha-Yi6JyN&typo=1&ancr_add=1>: cgroup-Granular FDP for Unmodified Workloads
* Site: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fhotstorage26.hotcrp.com%2fpaper%2f50&c=E,1,R2vzUYNd6-xoNCe8f5oH3Q_mydGZYxJoT8j9xaaM20JyFarS0iRMX2qMuN8IeZ7SpqmdlJ1LDgL0mPmwdAUIA2fFTCFvj7iESDQ6-m5BnBY5dA,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fhotstorage26.hotcrp.com%2fpaper%2f50&c=E,1,4svyARJML6j04ECFS_llBKnHJ0npz74EURBaqG-7EnbszwLrK5p5Mpi8I3tY8cgdFBC0VakxT4N6ciz4aDEmq3iqV9bGLlv_Ory9O-gUh_asXOYWhrQnUlJC&typo=1>

23 of 78 submissions were accepted. Congratulations!

The camera-ready version is due August 12, 2026 (Wednesday); this is a
hard deadline. The page limit for the camera-ready version is 6 pages,
excluding the references. Please improve your draft by addressing the
concerns mentioned in the reviews.

Please visit the HotStorage'26 HotCRP site for reviews, comments, and
related information. Reviews and comments are also included below.

Contact PC chairs <chairs26 at hotstorage.org<mailto:chairs26 at hotstorage.org>> with any questions or
concerns.

Sincerely,
Young-ri Choi and Bryan S. Kim
HotStorage 2026 Program Co-Chairs

Review #50A
===========================================================================

Overall merit
-------------
3. Weak accept

Reviewer expertise
------------------
3. Knowledgeable

Paper summary
-------------
The paper proposes assigning data placement hints via a new cgroup control knob, https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,dYmyYTeJp8XozcCUI7SpF2MdequTNNWj0f0HEGU8s6Nvezazl0U-3WUsRAE78ZIAq0bwYi0w5YKzI8w24XbQq60LHi1QqICikWGk5qnac7QysvFpxVFLDWlS&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,ah1Mhx88DF3KqTrzoM0hqvOQFYYEZXqGPA9P-a8922oyvNgE-t7eXTSIOciJ6lfpeju6wdRNMdAfDzrkH_T6Zxge8a10Ik8d1WywX8amulf1SUaC3_1ybo3Z&typo=1&ancr_add=1>, enabling per-device stream allocation for tenants or workloads. This approach improves NAND flash storage efficiency by reducing write amplification and performance interference. The mechanism is transparent and operator-friendly, although the paper notes that the ideal party to set these hints remains an open question.

Comments for authors
--------------------
Thank you for submitting your work to HotStorage ’26.

Strengths

1. Writing. The paper is clearly written and easy to follow. The motivation and implementation are described in enough detail to support reproducibility.
2. Rationale and design of https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,blgbPqW1kdohEVvPHyjsjzrpIDyTGDXDkoZf8P1B7vj92O8cBdziuquE_b4yLvDT9lxNKohm9FT9Naga0a6S8pOTNxyOQ5o0cPvFL7AMrkBYwHoN&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,0qL6M1dzHoYDnfv5z8jB2GqpduNW8VIf1BGjUSuRkc6nksurbTbth-rBo0iqKtX8agJvkwyQrNhTTBc7bloGEzlfYplxZs2sORm1LkuyMKauMCJfpb_s&typo=1&ancr_add=1> The design is elegant and focused. https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,-PmMwB8961DTwW5lm1rvseslWEUcMP7PGEtzo3ksLJg9vglWuXRUk-zD0tg1_E1OMPdzxtMU8xTkH35E-_DbybjAIZ31bq4_phmPyBxbk4OurIIg5Q,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,aTrkzCj_VGdUbeJcK9HrS-PU50YWeCjLsw6ZmWxqRRFRH5IUcEkeX-xzRLPcuzx2eRCdlbwKcBSZKuG-COUT3YHyXgjUzT3xVMBXZT0c&typo=1&ancr_add=1> performs a single task and only requires configuration from operators.
3. Potential impact. https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,AU3x94TnIUgtd4Ks0fjvo13wcYWQG4P9da-EkUb4CLkLX-eUZ9qk0oyLHDwCdUb3O_qJXOQBsIOgx12JHDvaApzSVwUOpr_FiYWQ2nlWV5zJVkrtEQ,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,mK_D-x-n_y08NWH7C9aFTnFtSXFNFuEDwYhJRfQj7owrZcTIHxtUXfvmqoooq8E1U5oSPeISwwum0OKIsopM8Bskv1Avw_0d6MFWm5Fv&typo=1&ancr_add=1> can reduce write amplification transparently with little overhead. The evaluation shows substantial improvements without requiring application changes.

Weaknesses

1. Evaluation soundness. The evaluation relies on synthetic workloads and lacks important experimental details. It is difficult to judge how well the results translate to practice. The paper does not describe the FDP SSD characteristics, preconditioning, or GC behavior. It is therefore unclear whether the results are stable or influenced by garbage collection peaks. Standard deviations, runtime measurements, and workload parameters, such as the number of keys used in fillrandom, are also missing.
2. Limited discussion of usefulness and use cases. The paper argues that operators should configure streams but provides little justification. It is unclear who deploys FDP SSDs, whether they are commonly used in multi-workload environments, and when operators should configure hints. These questions are largely deferred to future work.
3. Limited discussion of trade-offs. The paper advocates using cgroups but does not discuss when they may be unsuitable. Alternative approaches, such as implementing hints in the file system or applications, are mentioned but not evaluated. A comparison with these alternatives would better demonstrate the value of https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,dkAmEUbrRnEY_m1zCTXKoxOWxDGAA77wIzkkGE0hLyeVfIzlhYcHrheElCf7mNE1qPvECbWcQD6WoV3djB7t42WQ_6-2VrwjPP687Wa6EPUrCgyN2plQmlg,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,dVaA4eGifsC2yrdgvU6wVhzYbyWLVviX9RWfABfKX9J_tmYSrFfBfvvmvRbR-UBdISIkXXz8LnD4v-UAlM9bUDg-PmByLT9jerKyoWvK-iUNJ_bE_tkc&typo=1&ancr_add=1>

Suggestions for improvement

1. Expand the evaluation. Include more details about the FDP SSD, even if anonymized. Report results on conventional NVMe SSDs, standard deviations, preconditioning, GC behavior, and workload parameters.
2. Use more realistic benchmarks. Consider YCSB with RocksDB instead of only db_bench. Benchmarks representing multi-tenant environments would better demonstrate practical relevance.
3. Evaluate alternative approaches. Expand the discussion and, if possible, compare https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,ukLc0NpkpmbvlKtQoNs1KhuqApn42sKTniMUjmEq6ifMABirm6X4md1peeePuKGyrUAdEgWvT34MSqIft1Bqau74vH8TmQhtWYYv9vOxW2Y,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,EAeEFUxRD3QGcspS-DX_icR3HxFQl6F1ujc0kCx6nDNO3EVFRVHcZTtoikAbNzJGPbP54BvHab53udPpeG7X8OCHc0NCee6IiyF3IYDgFS6bcNSdQK6DznhZAjCE&typo=1&ancr_add=1> with application-level or file system based hinting mechanisms.

Conclusion

Overall, the paper explains https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,Rsxlr3pD4RqRXCzkvf4Asu6sl6uHEM4-gq3NMXeTPyngZlkKFDG3JH7duBtfRKHPu7PZi746bwToRG3h5zK-pn3KC6_huPvvNKWbEl2egw,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,FjWjAKWsHDQ3-xT-UySG_cIMmkv-8xmb1t-601GOr_3ckf85MVebMBsPbLkI75479WGT0s2CGzaK_qQYECSGy2MoOHE1ldyIpu9hfqc_r6TZs-cd&typo=1&ancr_add=1> clearly. The question of who should assign FDP write streams is interesting.

The paper would be stronger with a broader evaluation on both synthetic and realistic workloads. It would also benefit from a deeper discussion of when operators should configure streams and how https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,Y0njCpZ0RnHHFukjU1XhZLbGciQbxM471nGTg70DQFGWtI0sejUIDWjIqElU_Y9QY3fMTaUlZKgx4gjrdmQ90HKZichynulBOsm9_XC34GxqWtM6InPaPnke&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,LhuK_ZzGb4Uex0Wch9jXVXIx7hdkH7xgxDYybHt2T-5E9sITIvuf5zrIBD3YFIt88SCY6PJsrh05JxDgEVZWgqUOxjAkUWXeJobJOUL-RD1SXtCV0Obf1cOS3Hk,&typo=1&ancr_add=1> compares with alternative approaches.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Review #50B
===========================================================================

Overall merit
-------------
4. Accept

Reviewer expertise
------------------
3. Knowledgeable

Paper summary
-------------
The paper proposes that FDP placement streams should be added to control groups to isolate tenants without application modification. The proposed mechanism defaults to conventional placement across the device, and lets application-defined placement take precedence. It is implemented in the Linux kernel. The evaluation illustrates the potential pitfall of the approach: in case the number of streams defined in cgroups is larger than the number of FDP placement units, there is a risk that tenants with very different writing patterns are placed together -- the experiment shows that this results in worse performance than a conventional SSD.

Comments for authors
--------------------
Thanks for submitting this paper to HotStorage.
The idea of using cgroups for tenants isolation with FDP is obvious in retrospect. The paper does a very good job at explaining the precedence issues and the fallback mechanism, which is not obvious. The experiment shows that the fallback works as intended.
Some issues:
1. The paper repeatedly mentions "operators", but they are not defined.
2. The paper does not explain how an "operator" can take decisions about lifetime for a tenant and about lifetime coherence across tenants. This question is crucial for performance but it is not addressed in the paper.
3. The experimental framework is not clear. Which SSD model did you use for your experiments?
Stage1-3 are referenced in 5/Setup without being defined. This is confusing.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Review #50C
===========================================================================

Overall merit
-------------
4. Accept

Reviewer expertise
------------------
3. Knowledgeable

Paper summary
-------------
This work proposes https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,q_l5hBlj77QCheiM3z9az-dlKcKJjWcI_wjLQyUEKbcNCMHabfw5prHDctRR5eOU_yszK4fU2gS7F4Gb3OUv3KPtBH2xHjQeSJKEKqvD97S8Bw,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,DvhEpPJvGK7sYLyOXEk3NqkdLai2bukYlBHR-_lr7DgaO32PyBXiQ6TzMF6FLdpcvWenEtNGqvjkjguYyGRSMlAqqJv3KQzn7mabJzdgxJuP4l9ApOyx&typo=1&ancr_add=1>, a cgroup-v2 interface for assigning NVMe Flexible Data Placement (FDP) streams at cgroup granularity. The key idea is to enable an operator to assign a placement stream to a cgroup, so that the kernel can direct otherwise unplaced block I/Os from that cgroup to the corresponding FDP placement identifier, including both buffered and file-system writeback paths. Doing so makes FDP usable for unmodified workloads without requiring application-level per-I/O stream tagging. The proposal is easy to implement, requiring roughly 300 lines of code on Linux, and the evaluation shows that https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,fFn9G-hePuy8x3xsrViQegdytWsZvq1ZlkRpeA24S4oaS5mwJh-Ve0h7QEQHat-rFCyynVsC7w37cC7UxNs9Dvf35FiaG5b5Mr84a91K0GzLjw,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,a3kkDZ15dKgO8gEJpPtCdCeL6zRE0OKkxT977F-VbOQDtSRKoZyShW7Vm-mPldZmFiNBdSjVD4mMtDdOLwqAcgYvcLszETnd0ca7V2Vv&typo=1&ancr_add=1> can substantially reduce WAF when cgroups are mapped to streams in a lifetime-aware manner.

Comments for authors
--------------------
## Strengths
+ The work addresses an important and timely problem.
+ The proposed cgroup-based interface is simple, practical, and well aligned with how multi-tenant workloads are deployed and managed.
+ The implementation appears lightweight and minimally invasive.
+ The evaluation is fairly comprehensive for a workshop paper.

## Weaknesses
- The motivation and positioning sometimes overstate the limitation of current FDP support.
- The assumption that cgroups capture data lifetime is reasonable in some deployment settings, but should be stated more carefully.

## Detailed Comments
Thank you for submitting the work to HotStorage 2026. I found the work interesting and practically motivated. FDP is an important direction for reducing write amplification, but its practical benefit depends on whether placement hints can be provided properly. The proposal is a simple and compelling step toward making FDP usable for unmodified workloads, especially in multi-tenant or containerized environments where cgroups already represent an operator-visible unit of deployment and control.
My main concern is not with the proposal itself, but with how the current manuscript positions the limitation of existing FDP support and how clearly it separates the mechanism from the remaining policy problem.

### Positioning Should Be More Carefully Stated
The manuscript motivates https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,p50hI8KRP9u0SRLFVZhmT2Ts516lXkJqNO4K_st4bfvFS0YKo8Nbds0ubr63ZRBJWogpIkLZG7hsjKKp7fWKn0PSEhjAl9pFPnepDNQ-&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,cZ9AfJTwrE4u_VMA1hGlNwkxx2pVAzbk4zgqMA9XxRmwLUlmQVPLy9Uxb_dtF6K583_IAGr0_zU4A9ja37BCGLsHTBXHulhVsAjgf0Z-UHpGV_uhm-Z2R_jo&typo=1&ancr_add=1> by arguing that current Linux FDP support mainly reaches rewritten direct-I/O applications that explicitly provide per-I/O stream hints. This is valid, but the manuscript sometimes reads as if FDP adoption faces a more fundamental limitation, which I think should be toned down. The limitation appears to be due to the current Linux interface and ecosystem support, rather than a fundamental limitation of FDP itself. As Linux evolves, appropriate kernel, VFS, writeback, or file-system extensions could also improve FDP applicability. In this sense, https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,l_KeGWWuKPNM3jQCmyZNUOOt8BbZ-08X_Ny6pS4YmzgYxw2KcEB5jUjZuVH23lVEVUPdFEq4oHfP-ZngyOmkI8Z5ErrKVH0RFR8Z_wb-&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,NMDfVD19glIu9XWMWjxMJfJhY-6HMLT5S1PtK5qbFpyVhUmwyA2RoEj8WSXqyVwuNCW27bJDRvyyslNZn_w1ZHe-ZR1oEddJpA8fDy9TPdNsRz8,&typo=1&ancr_add=1> should be positioned as a practical and minimally invasive first step toward broader FDP adoption, not necessarily as the only or definitive way to make FDP useful for unmodified workloads. This distinction matters because the contribution is already strong without overstating the problem. The manuscript can simply say that current upstream support lacks an operator-controlled, application-transparent producer of FDP placement hints for buffered and writeback I/O, and that https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,TaxvxyY3QKz86ZBI-AD2F0lT8Vg_h3PyUJZh5yk-69ieQ7UwEehHw3n3uBSOav0ABmioAoez8INbHrPRnjbVLH3UD_Q86fxQH02PIM5eHbrChWrVAyA,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,XQF6SmbUp-17rufBUOTA4wkxT7DltaVARlXhvaliKyzAnsqbCPa7QWj4IjjsruDn_1olemYzbigstWvt7DhX9chatiEW7QcgFjTWRg0mI1EVpWll9PEXL6k,&typo=1&ancr_add=1> fills this gap by reusing cgroup attribution already available in the block layer.

### Clarify the Scope of Cgroup-Level Placement
Using cgroups as the placement granularity is a reasonable and deployable choice, but cgroups primarily capture ownership, deployment, and resource-control boundaries; they do not always capture data lifetime. A single application cgroup may contain data with very different lifetimes, such as WAL files, SSTables, indexes, temporary files, and metadata. The manuscript acknowledges this in the discussion by contrasting macro-level cgroup placement with micro-level per-I/O tagging, but I think this point should be emphasized more carefully. In my view, https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,q_PuAaFDktMLU4Ny1OTKbS1bdlc8OZphmsGYvMq2eqMIPoGG5J7HYCuqjYvt3KyEdAtk7DWYxetlwOCLwM_UVxKZkg2LR5904OqYCANQUw,,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,3rM03cOSl2zcs2JJYrCYuW8UgDO8r8OhHUBvZGRFXGO3SABor9R-zRhfQq3lSGYStfVo17HYZk3zdCV2vV9X-6_L_soBmWmE-OqXjVbQtsg20htXghKwIWO9&typo=1&ancr_add=1> is best positioned as complementary to other FDP mechanisms. Per-I/O tagging can express fine-grained lifetime information within an application, while cgroup-level tagging can provide operator-controlled placement across tenants or services. This complementary framing is strong and avoids implying that cgroups are always the right abstraction for data lifetime.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Review #50D
===========================================================================

Overall merit
-------------
4. Accept

Reviewer expertise
------------------
2. Some familiarity

Paper summary
-------------
FDP devices allow users to specify placement hints to reduce write amplification. However, it requires application cooperation: direct I/O using io_uring, kernel write back and mmap cannot leverage the feature. This paper observes that production deployments use cgroup, which carries tenant id that can be used as a hint. The paper proposes https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,p7ImDV_izXavLHvSksoO3sATsApLc_zREoTBxgO91h1owcg0VC3D-8qZ8I6_IRXONJQy9CmDR_fiunT8_FyLUjMup0y4WODWXbWU457q-JmslxKzxYMT_UegFa4,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,yG5n26gen9QmWfN9qr3Ssmtw9EVLrBYbWSh_2bTyJzY2T-YLRgXC49qWl1M9MMIfcO52L-CaGak8nJdsNFcVCe347-PQK3tqFsuIZ5l9W-gU&typo=1&ancr_add=1> and demonstrates that https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,7uC9c0xnzleK_kLrsojM9ZwQOjvUFMt-QxcT7LoM9jq3lqP4k2VVhfQz6Tz3eFf5N35wAgHc6WdrG2isN7N4Vpuwk_OfqSFVQr10OcEY&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,0GcEhxLa5u-cutGwnsTcuBlF0RhBTrht4TTvp2o6OhZ04fCU3StuSp-zwD9Wf2KymIuRjPGLRELyeetvz6WUuibg0-tY5TExhMylyBfCcUbAYis,&typo=1&ancr_add=1> passes cgroups tenant information that can better utilize FDP and reduce write amplification.

Comments for authors
--------------------
Thank you for submitting to hotStorage! I enjoy reading this paper. Leveraging cgroups as a hint is an interesting and effective idea. I like the new design and the results shown by the authors. While this paper provides a mechanism, one key algorithm design for future work is to map logical IDs to physical ones on SSD. The authors show that it is effective in an offline setting, but how to achieve it online remains a challenging task.

Comment @A1 by Reviewer A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congratulations on the acceptance of your paper.

The reviewers agreed that https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,osE5om6MVkeCFAxwIrrerQQMYmXnPA2U36piXTuxQQJpOiK_a5oSXUIHLEHZ5LLSK3a8mNZ2ZMHj6n0W9Dch4IoVvDFjlHiujUy7Q1kv9J9OnGkA-ZMbIpk,&typo=1<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fio.stream&c=E,1,tGHOqeEHmOtEoRCigyXQQCyBidhk2JE5ndPMbcuxgMZQ1meN3KHbwCFSah2gbCDZjdLnxKBcLLgBKWJodD6Z-5eI5Dkm2tUt3W12IaRMotyWSZnD9Fq7&typo=1&ancr_add=1> offers a simple and practical cgroup-based mechanism for FDP placement in unmodified, multi-tenant workloads.

The main concerns were the limited evaluation, unclear experimental details, and the unresolved challenge of mapping diverse data lifetimes onto a limited number of streams. Reviewers also noted that cgroups may not always reflect data lifetimes and there may be a need to complement them with file-system or per-I/O approaches.

The paper was recognized as a good fit for HotStorage, and we are excited for the engaging discussions it will inspire.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/pipermail/hotstorage-chairs/attachments/20260801/22b1c33b/attachment-0001.htm>