The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The dataflow model: a practical approach to balancing correctness, latency, and cost in massive-scale, unbounded, out-of-order data processing
Abstract
Unbounded, unordered, global-scale datasets are increasingly common in day-to-day business (e.g. Web logs, mobile usage statistics, and sensor networks). At the same time, consumers of these datasets have evolved sophisticated requirements, such as event-time ordering and windowing by features of the data themselves, in addition to an insatiable hunger for faster answers. Meanwhile, practicality dictates that one can never fully optimize along all dimensions of correctness, latency, and cost for these types of input. As a result, data processing practitioners are left with the quandary of how to reconcile the tensions between these seemingly competing propositions, often resulting in disparate implementations and systems. We propose that a fundamental shift of approach is necessary to deal with these evolved requirements in modern data processing. We as a field must stop trying to groom unbounded datasets into finite pools of information that eventually become complete, and instead live and breathe under the assumption that we will never know if or when we have seen all of our data, only that new data will arrive, old data may be retracted, and the only way to make this problem tractable is via principled abstractions that allow the practitioner the choice of appropriate tradeoffs along the axes of interest: correctness, latency, and cost. In this paper, we present one such approach, the Dataflow Model, along with a detailed examination of the semantics it enables, an overview of the core principles that guided its design, and a validation of the model itself via the real-world experiences that led to its development.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Apache Beam implements Google's Dataflow model.
“Apache Beam implements Google's Dataflow model (Akidau et al., 2015), which is also internally used by Google's cloud service Google Cloud Dataflow.”
From Benchmarking scalability of stream processing frameworks deployed as microservices in the cloud (2024) · cites this paper as Akidau et al., 2015
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- 10.1007/s00778-003-0095-z · DOI
- Akidau T., 2013, Proc. of the 39th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB)
- 10.1007/s00778-014-0357-y · DOI
- Barga R. S., 2007, Proc. of the Third Biennial Conf. on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR), 363
- 10.14778/1920841.1920874 · DOI
- 10.14778/2733004.2733016 · DOI
- Chambers C., 2010, Efficient Data-Parallel Pipelines. In Proc. of the 2010 ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), 363
- Chandramouli B., 2015, Trill: A High-Performance Incremental Query Processor for Diverse Analytics. In Proc. of the 41st Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB)
- Chandrasekaran S., 2003, TelegraphCQ: Continuous Dataflow Processing. In Proc. of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data (SIGMOD), SIGMOD '03, 668, 10.1145/872757.872857 · DOI
- Chen J., 2000, NiagaraCQ: A Scalable Continuous Query System for Internet Databases. In Proc. of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data (SIGMOD), 379
- Dean J., 2004, Proc. of the Sixth Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation (OSDI)
- 10.14778/1687553.1687568 · DOI
- Johnson T., 2005, Proc. of the 31st Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), 1079
- Li J., 2005, Proceedings og the ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data (SIGMOD), 311
- 10.14778/1453856.1453890 · DOI
- Maier D., 2005, Proc. of the 10th Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT), 37
- Srivastava U., 2004, Proc. of the 23rd ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symp. on Princ. of Database Systems, 263
- 10.14778/1687553.1687609 · DOI
- 10.1109/TKDE.2003.1198390 · DOI
- Whiteneck J., 1878, Proc. of the ACM SIGSPATIAL Int. Workshop on GeoStreaming (IWGS), 2010
- Zaharia M., 2012, Proc. of the 9th USENIX Conf. on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), 15
- Zaharia M., 2013, Proc. of the 24th ACM Symp. on Operating Systems Principles
Cited by
Sorted by citations
MediaPipe: A framework for building perception pipelines
Lugaresi, C., Tang, J., Nash, H., McClanahan, C., Uboweja, E., Hays, M., Zhang, F., Chang, C.-L., Yong, M. G., Lee, J., et al. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.08172 · Cited by 1,043
Verma, S., Kawamoto, Y., Fadlullah, Z. M., Nishiyama, H., & Kato, N. (2017) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2017.2694469 · Cited by 422
Benchmarking scalability of stream processing frameworks deployed as microservices in the cloud
Henning, S., & Hasselbring, W. (2024) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2023.111879 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Akidau, T., Bradshaw, R., Chambers, C., Chernyak, S., Fernández-Moctezuma, R. J., Lax, R., McVeety, S., Mills, D., Perry, F., Schmidt, E., & Whittle, S.
- Affiliations
- Google (United States) (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment
- Published
- 2015-08
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1792-1803
- ISSN
- 2150-8097 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2247317079
- Cited by
- 750
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 124 · 2025: 87 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 84 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 97.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Data Stream Mining Techniques
- Keywords
- dataflow model, unbounded data, stream processing, sliding window aggregation, data semantics, blogs, sensor networks
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review