110 likes | 242 Views
Storage Management Issues for Sensor Networks. Sameer Tilak (SUNY Binghamton) Wendi Heinzelman (Univ. of Rochester) Nael Abu-Ghazaleh (SUNY Binghamton). Network Partitioning. Problem. For tiny sensors storage is a scarce resource
E N D
Storage Management Issues for Sensor Networks Sameer Tilak (SUNY Binghamton) Wendi Heinzelman (Univ. of Rochester) Nael Abu-Ghazaleh (SUNY Binghamton)
Problem • For tiny sensors storage is a scarce resource • Naïve protocols can lead to loss of information or inefficient storage • Need efficient storage management protocol • Un-partitioned network • If delays can be tolerated instead of reporting to the base station, data can be aggregated and stored in the network to increase energy efficiency
Protocol Design Goals • Higher storage-time • Low average storage/sensor • Fault-tolerance, high reliability • Scalable • Low protocol overhead • High energy efficiency
Candidate Protocols • Local Storage • Deterministic Broadcast (Bcast) • Probabilistic Broadcast (PBcast) • Clustering
Local Storage = storage/sensor • No communication • Each sensor stores its own data locally, low fault-tolerance • No spatial aggregation
Broadcast (Bcast) = storage/sensor • All sensors store data • All sensors broadcast data to neighbors, high fault-tolerance • Spatial aggregation possible
PBcast = storage/sensor • Sensors probabilistically send/store data, high fault-tolerance • Spatial aggregation possible
Clustering Round 1 (time = 0) Round 2 (time = 20) • Only CH stores data • Rotate CH • Distributed storage, medium fault-tolerance • Spatial aggregation possible Round 1 (time = 40)
Clustering: Scales well, low storage • Bcast: Scaling problem, high storage • Pbcast,Local: Scales well