MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495007994 · doi:10.1109/qosa.2016.12

Estimating Response Time Percentiles of Cloud-Based Tiered Web Applications in Presence of VM Failures

2016· article· en· W2495007994 on OpenAlexaff
Olivia Das, Arindam Das

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingDistributed computingVirtual machineLive migrationResponse timeVirtual networkQueueing theorySoftware deploymentDiscrete event simulationComputer networkOperating systemVirtualizationSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasingly, software applications are being deployed in clouds because cloud computing offers several advantages -- for example, it relieves the application service providers from buying and maintaining data centers thereby reducing the operational costs, it allows dynamic scaling of virtual machines as required on a pay-per-use basis, and, it promotes easy deployment in multiple geographic locations at minimal cost. A key challenge in deploying a multi-tier web application in cloud is to achieve low variability in its response time. In this paper, we analyze the behaviour of a 3-tier cloud-based web application. We propose a hierarchical model to compute the response-time distribution that considers performance degradation of the application due to VM failures. Our model applies order statistics to describe the application's availability behavior and open queueing network to describe its performance behavior. We solve the open queueing network using discrete event simulation. The results show that in a 3-tier system, a configuration with large number of virtual machines (VMs) does not necessarily perform better than a configuration with smaller number of VMs. Moreover, for a given set of performance and availability parameters, the results further show that different system configurations containing the same number of VMs yield different performance depending on the replication level of the VMs in different tiers. We demonstrate that our model can be exploited to support the selection of appropriate number of replicas for different tiers that would meet the service-level agreement specified in terms of response-time percentiles.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207