Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.07175

Enabling High-Bandwidth Flash for Generative Recommendation Serving with Write-Aware KV Cache Policy

Abstract

Generative recommendation (GR) systems increasingly leverage user-level KV cache reuse to avoid recomputing long user histories. However, the growing KV cache capacity and bandwidth requirements introduce new challenges for memory system. High-Bandwidth Flash (HBF) provides a promising solution by offering substantially higher capacity than HBM while approaching HBM-class read bandwidth, enabling larger scale KV cache retention and improved serving throughput. Yet conventional Least-Recently-Used (LRU) KV cache management tightly couples KV cache writes with cache misses, generating excessive write traffic that rapidly exhausts flash endurance. In this work, we evaluate a write-aware KV cache policy based on admission-controlled LRU-K for HBF-based GR serving. By filtering low-reuse users before cache admission, LRU-K decouples KV cache writes from misses and significantly reduces unnecessary writes. We develop an analytical model to characterize GR serving performance, KV cache write traffic, and HBF lifetime, and evaluate performance across diverse memory systems and GR workloads. Our results show that HBF-based systems achieve 3.8 to 4.7 times higher throughput than HBM-only systems. Moreover, LRU-K extends HBF lifetime from about one year under conventional LRU to over six years with a moderate K=10, while maintaining comparable or even slightly improved throughput. These results highlight the importance of write aware KV cache policy for sustainable HBF-based GR serving.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Danni Peng, Kai Wu, Tianyu Zuo, Pengfei Xia, Hui Zang. 2026-09-07. Enabling High-Bandwidth Flash for Generative Recommendation Serving with Write-Aware KV Cache Policy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07175

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Deep belief networks are exact

We prove that every strictly positive probability distribution on \(\{-1,1\}^n\) is represented exactly by a sigmoid belief network with finite parameters. This answers a question of Sutskever and Hinton. The proof upgrades their probability-sharing approximation to exact representation using Brouwer's fixed-point theorem.

cs.AI

Benchmark Scores Are Pipeline-Dependent: A Reliability Audit of Cybersecurity LLM Benchmarks

Large language model (LLM) benchmarks are often treated as fixed datasets with stable scores, yet their outcomes depend on configurable evaluation pipelines. We audit eight cybersecurity benchmarks across 10 proprietary, open-weight, and cybersecurity-specialized LLMs. By modeling benchmarks as measurement pipelines, we identify 15 systematic failure modes and show that a single pipeline choice can change a model's score by more than 80 percentage points and substantially alter model rankings. At the cross-benchmark level, two semantically similar task pairs rank the same models differently because of incompatible evaluation conventions. Under an evaluation harness that standardizes pipeline choices while preserving task semantics, nine of 10 models shift by at least three ranks on at least one benchmark. These results show that cybersecurity LLM benchmark scores are pipeline-dependent and motivate pipeline-aware auditing as a core requirement for reliable model evaluation.

cs.CR

Are Widely Known Findings Easier to Retract?

Failures of retraction are common in science. Why do they occur? And what determines whether a retraction is successful? We use data from citation records and Altmetrics to test proposed answers to these questions. LaCroix et al. employ network models to argue the social spread of information helps explain failures of retraction. One prediction is that widely known results, surprisingly, should be easier to retract, since their retraction is more relevant. Our results support this conclusion. We find highly cited papers show more significant reductions in citation after retraction and garner more attention to their retractions as they occur.

cs.DL