4 ms·

I don't think academics view ATC as particularly highly prestigious. Just within systems there are many other conferences which are either more, or just as, pre

I don't think academics view ATC as particularly highly prestigious. Just within systems there are many other conferences which are either more, or just as, prestigious as ATC: OSDI, SOSP, NSDI, SIGMOD, VLDB, SIGCOMM, EuroSys. Especially the first three are viewed to be much higher prestige than ATC, at least from my perspective.

linguae 1y ago
I used to be a grad student in a file systems lab at UC Santa Cruz over a decade ago. It was considered a dream to publish in OSDI or SOSP; our lab’s most successful paper was the OSDI 2006 paper on Ceph. We also thought very highly of VLDB, though most of our work was outside the interests of the database community. We regularly published in USENIX FAST and made occasional appearances at USENIX ATC.
bcantrill 1y ago
I really don't care about how prestigious academics view (or viewed) ATC, but for whatever it's worth when our paper was accepted in 2004, was just under 13%. That is bluntly too oversubscribed for the practitioner (whose job is to ship systems, not win paper popularity contests -- or adjudicate those popularity contests by serving on program committees). In some ways, if ATC wasn't thought prestigious, it's even worse -- it means that practitioners lost our conference for nothing at all. A final note: given that OSDI is on your list of prestigious conferences, the way the program committee was conducted in 2010 (which I outlined in my ATC keynote[0]) should be particularly galling. [0] https://speakerdeck.com/bcantrill/a-wardrobe-for-the-emperor-stitching-practical-bias-into-systems-software-research?slide=34 https://speakerdeck.com/bcantrill/a-wardrobe-for-the-emperor...
- sedev 1y ago
  Request for clarification: 13% of what?
  - bcantrill 1y ago
    13% of submissions to the conference were accepted to present.
anonymousDan 1y ago
I think ATC is viewed as being a prestigious conference at roughly the level of some of the above.

linguae 1y ago

I used to be a grad student in a file systems lab at UC Santa Cruz over a decade ago. It was considered a dream to publish in OSDI or SOSP; our lab’s most successful paper was the OSDI 2006 paper on Ceph. We also thought very highly of VLDB, though most of our work was outside the interests of the database community. We regularly published in USENIX FAST and made occasional appearances at USENIX ATC.

bcantrill 1y ago

I really don't care about how prestigious academics view (or viewed) ATC, but for whatever it's worth when our paper was accepted in 2004, was just under 13%. That is bluntly too oversubscribed for the practitioner (whose job is to ship systems, not win paper popularity contests -- or adjudicate those popularity contests by serving on program committees). In some ways, if ATC wasn't thought prestigious, it's even worse -- it means that practitioners lost our conference for nothing at all. A final note: given that OSDI is on your list of prestigious conferences, the way the program committee was conducted in 2010 (which I outlined in my ATC keynote[0]) should be particularly galling. [0] https://speakerdeck.com/bcantrill/a-wardrobe-for-the-emperor-stitching-practical-bias-into-systems-software-research?slide=34 https://speakerdeck.com/bcantrill/a-wardrobe-for-the-emperor...

sedev 1y ago
Request for clarification: 13% of what?
- bcantrill 1y ago
  13% of submissions to the conference were accepted to present.

anonymousDan 1y ago

I think ATC is viewed as being a prestigious conference at roughly the level of some of the above.