SOPRAN: Integrative Workload Modeling and Proactive Reoptimization for Virtual Machine Management

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jul 1, 2011
https://doi.org/10.47164/ijngc.v2i2.98
Download
pdf
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 2, Issue 2 July 2011: SPECIAL ISSUE ON CLOUD COMPUTING

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Jian Zhou
Lei Shi
Kian-Lee Tan

Abstract

For a data center to operate effectively (i.e., meeting customers’ Service Level Agreements (SLAs)) and efficiently (i.e., minimizing resource consumption), the virtual machines (VMs) must be carefully managed. In particular, as the resource demands of VMs change, the assignment of VMs to physical machines becomes sub-optimal. VM replication and migration provide a solution for dealing with dynamic workloads. However, as migrations are costly, an effective control policy is critical to avoid frequent migrations. Moreover, an agile decision making component is also important to reduce feedback latencies. In this paper we propose SOPRAN, a virtual machinemanagement system leveraging an integrative workload model for the data center, that can dynamically adapt the assignment of VMs to physical machines to minimize resource consumption without sacrificing the SLAs. Different from existing trace-based methods for this problem, SOPRAN characterizes the dynamic workloads in the system using an integrative risk cube model, and approximates the workload demands with a representative state set. The optimal plan for each representative state is incrementally generated, forming the switchable plan set. At runtime, a two-phase re-optimization strategy matches the current system demand to the closest representative state and actuates the corresponding plan in the switchable plan set. At the same time, online monitors profile the actual demands and refine the risk cube to guarantee the model’s accuracy. This modeling technique and optimization procedure based on it brings the great savings in optimization cost and migration opportunities, and enables the high scalability of SOPRAN. We evaluated SOPRAN against the state-of-the-art IBM MFR algorithm. The results show that, with comparable resource consumptions, SOPRAN can achieve more stable SLA violationrate of no more than 4%, 80% lower migration rate, and save up to 90% reoptimization overhead.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Jian Zhou, Lei Shi, & Kian-Lee Tan. (2011). SOPRAN: Integrative Workload Modeling and Proactive Reoptimization for Virtual Machine Management. International Journal of Next-Generation Computing, 2(2), 102–122. https://doi.org/10.47164/ijngc.v2i2.98
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Abdelzaher, T. F., Shin, K. G., and Bhatti, N. 2002. Performance guarantees for web server end-systems: A control-theoretical approach. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 13, 80–96.
  2. Barham, P., Dragovic, B., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Harris, T., Ho, A., Neugebauer, R., Pratt, I., and Warfield, A. 2003. Xen and the art of virtualization. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM symposium on Operating systems principles(SOSP).
  3. Bobroff, N., Kochut, A., and Beaty, K. 2007. Dynamic placement of virtual machines for managing sla violations. In 10th IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management. IEEE.
  4. Brantner, M., Florescu, D., Graf, D., Kossmann, D., and Kraska, T. 2008. Building a database on s3. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data(SIGMOD).
  5. Bu, X., Rao, J., and Xu, C.-Z. 2009. A reinforcement learning approach to online web systems auto-configuration. In Proceedings of 29th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems(ICDCS).
  6. Cherkasova, L. and Gardner, R. 2005. Measuring cpu overhead for i/o processing in the xen virtual machine monitor. In Proceedings of the annual conference on USENIX Annual Technical Conference(ATEC).
  7. Clark, C., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Hansen, J. G., Jul, E., Limpach, C., Pratt, I., and Warfield, A. 2005. Live migration of virtual machines. In Proceedings of conference on Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation(NSDI).
  8. Fito, J., Goiri, I., and Guitart, J. 2010. Sla-driven elastic cloud hosting provider. In Proceedings of 18th Euromicro International Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-Based Processing (PDP).
  9. Garfinkel, T., Pfaff, B., Chow, J., Rosenblum, M., and Boneh, D. 2003. Terra: a virtual machine-based platform for trusted computing. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM symposium on Operating systems principles(SOSP).
  10. Gmach, D., Rolia, J., Cherkasova, L., Belrose, G., Turicchi, T., and Kemper, A. 2008. An integrated approach to resource pool management: Policies, efficiency and quality metrics. In Dependable Systems and Networks With FTCS and DCC, 2008. DSN 2008. IEEE International Conference on. 326 –335.
  11. Gulati, A., Merchant, A., Uysal, M., Padala, P., and Varman, P. 2009. Efficient and adaptive proportional share i/o scheduling. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 37, 2.
  12. Haletky, E. L. 2007. VMware ESX Server in the Enterprise: Planning and Securing Virtualization Servers. Prentice Hall.
  13. Jang, J.-W., Jeon, M., Kim, H.-S., Jo, H., Kim, J.-S., and Maeng, S. 2011. Energy reduction in consolidated servers through memory-aware virtual machine scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Computers 60, 552–564.
  14. Jung, G., Joshi, K. R., Hiltunen, M. A., Schlichting, R. D., and Pu, C. 2009. A cost-sensitive adaptation engine for server consolidation of multitier applications. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Conference on Middleware. Middleware ’09. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 9:1–9:20.
  15. Kansal, A., Zhao, F., Liu, J., Kothari, N., and Bhattacharya, A. A. 2010. Virtual machine power metering and provisioning. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM symposium on Cloud computing. SoCC ’10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 39–50.
  16. Karve, A., Kimbrel, T., Pacifici, G., Spreitzer, M., Steinder, M., Sviridenko, M., and Tantawi, A. 2006. Dynamic placement for clustered web applications. In Proceedings of the international conference on World Wide Web(WWW).
  17. Kim, H., Lim, H., Jeong, J., Jo, H., and Lee, J. 2009. Task-aware virtual machine scheduling for i/o performance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS international conference on Virtual execution environments(VEE). ACM, New York, NY, USA.
  18. Kimbrel, T., Schieber, B., and Sviridenko, M. 2004. Minimizing migrations in fair multiprocessor scheduling of persistent tasks. In Proceedings of the 15th annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms(SODA).
  19. McNett, M., Gupta, D., Vahdat, A., and Voelker, G. M. 2007. Usher: an extensible framework for managing custers of virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 21st conference on Large Installation System Administration Conference(LISA).
  20. Ng, C., Parkes, D. C., and Seltzer, M. 2003. Virtual worlds: fast and strategyproof auctions for dynamic resource allocation. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM conference on Electronic commerce(EC).
  21. Ongaro, D., Cox, A. L., and Rixner, S. 2008. Scheduling i/o in virtual machine monitors. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS international conference on Virtual execution environments(VEE).
  22. Padala, P., Hou, K.-Y., Shin, K. G., Zhu, X., Uysal, M., Wang, Z., Singhal, S., and Merchant, A. 2009. Automated control of multiple virtualized resources. In Proceedings of ACM European conference on Computer systems(EuroSys).
  23. Rolia, J., Cherkasova, L., Arlitt, M., and Andrzejak, A. 2005. A capacity management service for resource pools. In Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Software and performance. WOSP ’05. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 229–237.
  24. Rolia, J., Zhu, X., Arlitt, M., and Andrzejak, A. 2004. Statistical service assurances for applications in utility grid environments. Perform. Eval. 58, 319–339.
  25. Sapuntzakis, C. P., Chandra, R., Pfaff, B., Chow, J., Lam, M. S., and Rosenblum, M. 2002. Optimizing the migration of virtual computers. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation(OSDI). 377–390.
  26. Seltzsam, S., Gmach, D., Krompass, S., Kemper, A., and Mnchen, T. U. 2006. Autoglobe: An automatic administration concept for service-oriented database applications. In Proc. of the 22nd Intl. Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE2006), Industrial Track.
  27. Soror, A. A., Minhas, U. F., Aboulnaga, A., Salem, K., Kokosielis, P., and Kamath, S. 2008. Automatic virtual machine configuration for database workloads. In SIGMOD.
  28. Urgaonkar, B., Shenoy, P., and Roscoe, T. 2002. Resource overbooking and application profiling in shared hosting platforms. In OSDI.
  29. Verma, A., Ahuja, P., and Neogi, A. 2008. pmapper: Power and migration cost aware application placement in virtualized systems. In Proceedings of the ACM/IFIP/USENIX 9th International Middleware Conference. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 243–264.
  30. Verma, A., Kumar, G., and Koller, R. 2010. The cost of reconfiguration in a cloud. In Proceedings of the 11th International Middleware Conference Industrial track. Middleware Industrial Track ’10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 11–16.
  31. Wang, X., Lan, D., Wang, G., Fang, X., Ye, M., Chen, Y., and Wang, Q. 2007. Appliance-based autonomic provisioning framework for virtualized outsourcing data center. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Autonomic Computing(ICAC).
  32. Wood, T., Shenoy, P., Venkataramani, A., and Yousif, M. 2007. Abstract black-box and gray-box strategies for virtual machine migration. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation(NSDI).
  33. Xu, J., Zhao, M., Fortes, J., Carpenter, R., and Yousif, M. 2007. On the use of fuzzy modeling in virtualized data center management. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Autonomic Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA.