MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766857375 · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2767703

On-Demand Capacity Provisioning in Storage Clusters Through Workload Pattern Modeling

2017· article· en· W2766857375 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng Hu, Yuhui Deng, Laurence T. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProvisioningComputer scienceDistributed computingQuality of serviceWorkloadQueueing theoryCapacity planningResource (disambiguation)Computer networkResource allocationEnergy consumptionVariety (cybernetics)Operating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internet of Things (IoT), which is the inter-networking of a wide variety of physical devices, is widely used in our daily life. The exponential increase in the number of diverse devices has resulted in a significant increase in the volume, variety, velocity, and veracity of data (i.e., big data). These data present a large requirement on modern storage systems both for capacity and scale, and energy cost has become a critical problem. For storage clusters, much research effort has been invested in alleviating this problem by providing suitable resource capacity (i.e., on-demand providing). However, it is challenging to match the offered resource capacity with the real system workloads, thus resulting in a violation of service level agreement. By considering a storage cluster as a queueing system, this paper proposes a QoS-oriented capacity provisioning mechanism. Based on workload features, the mechanism models the pattern of current workloads as a suitable queueing model. In accordance with the model, our mechanism can well forecast the actual resource capacity demand without violating the service level agreement, and then offer the required resource capacity in terms of the real workloads. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed mechanism significantly reduces the energy consumption of a typical storage cluster, while meeting the QoS requirements. It also significantly outperforms two classic and two state-of-the-art capacity provisioning mechanisms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207