<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Enrico Bocchi</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Idilio Drago</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Marco Mellia</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Personal Cloud Storage Benchmarks and Comparison</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cloud Computing, IEEE Transactions on</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Benchmark testing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cloud computing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cloud storage</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computers</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Google</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Measurements</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Performance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Servers</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Synchronization</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PP</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1-1</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The large amount of space offered by personal cloud storage services (e.g., Dropbox and OneDrive), together with the possibility of synchronizing devices seamlessly, keep attracting customers to the cloud. Despite the high public interest, little information about system design and actual implications on performance is available when selecting a cloud storage service. Systematic benchmarks to assist in comparing services and understanding the effects of design choices are still lacking. This paper proposes a methodology to understand and benchmark personal cloud storage services. Our methodology unveils their architecture and capabilities. Moreover, by means of repeatable and customizable tests, it allows the measurement of performance metrics under different workloads. The effectiveness of the methodology is shown in a case study in which 11 services are compared under the same conditions. Our case study reveals interesting differences in design choices. Their implications are assessed in a series of benchmarks. Results show no clear winner, with all services having potential for improving performance. In some scenarios, the synchronization of the same files can take 20 times longer. In other cases, we observe a wastage of twice as much network capacity, questioning the design of some services. Our methodology and results are thus useful both as benchmarks and as guidelines for system design.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Enrico Bocchi</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Idilio Drago</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Marco Mellia</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Personal Cloud Storage: Usage, Performance and Impact of Terminals </style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4th IEEE International Conference on Cloud Networking (IEEE CloudNet 2015)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cloud storage</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Monitoring</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10/2015</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ieee-cloudnet.org/program.html</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IEEE</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Niagara Falls, Canada</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Personal cloud storage services such as Dropbox and OneDrive are popular among Internet users. They help in sharing content and backing up data by relying on the cloud to store files. The rise of mobile terminals and the presence of new providers question whether the usage of cloud storage is evolving. This knowledge is essential to understand the workload these services need to handle, their performance, and implications. In this paper we present a comprehensive characterization of personal cloud storage services. Relying on traces collected for one month in an operational network, we show that users of each service present distinct behaviors. Dropbox is now threatened by competitors, with OneDrive and Google Drive reaching large market shares. However, the popularity of the latter services seems to be driven by their integration into Windows and Android. Indeed, around 50% of their users do not produce any workload. Considering performance, providers show distinct trade-offs, with bottlenecks that hardly allow users to fully exploit their access line bandwidth. Finally, usage of cloud services is now ordinary among mobile users, thanks to the automatic backup of pictures and media files.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>