MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072362295 · doi:10.1109/tcc.2014.2306427

Dynamic Heterogeneity-Aware Resource Provisioning in the Cloud

2014· article· en· W2072362295 on OpenAlexaff
Qi Zhang, Mohamed Faten Zhani, Raouf Boutaba, Joseph L. Hellerstein

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningComputer scienceCloud computingDistributed computingEnergy consumptionWorkloadScheduling (production processes)Cluster analysisEfficient energy useComputer networkMathematical optimizationOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data centers consume tremendous amounts of energy in terms of power distribution and cooling. Dynamic capacity provisioning is a promising approach for reducing energy consumption by dynamically adjusting the number of active machines to match resource demands. However, despite extensive studies of the problem, existing solutions have not fully considered the heterogeneity of both workload and machine hardware found in production environments. In particular, production data centers often comprise heterogeneous machines with different capacities and energy consumption characteristics. Meanwhile, the production cloud workloads typically consist of diverse applications with different priorities, performance and resource requirements. Failure to consider the heterogeneity of both machines and workloads will lead to both sub-optimal energy-savings and long scheduling delays, due to incompatibility between workload requirements and the resources offered by the provisioned machines. To address this limitation, we present Harmony, a Heterogeneity-Aware dynamic capacity provisioning scheme for cloud data centers. Specifically, we first use the K-means clustering algorithm to divide workload into distinct task classes with similar characteristics in terms of resource and performance requirements. Then we present a technique that dynamically adjusting the number of machines to minimize total energy consumption and scheduling delay. Simulations using traces from a Google's compute cluster demonstrate Harmony can reduce energy by 28 percent compared to heterogeneity-oblivious solutions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations205
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Cloud ComputingSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207