HyScale: Hybrid and Network Scaling of Dockerized Microservices in Cloud Data Centres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When designing modern software, care must be taken to allow for applications to scale based on the demands of its users while still accommodating flexibility in development. Recently, microservices architectures have garnered the attention of many organizations-providing higher levels of scalability, availability, and fault isolation. Many organizations choose to host their microservices architectures in cloud data centres to offset costs. Incidentally, data centres become over-encumbered during peak usage hours and underutilized during off-peak hours. Traditional microservice scaling methods perform either horizontal or vertical scaling exclusively. When used in combination, however, these methods offer complementary benefits and compensate for each other's deficiencies. To leverage the high availability of horizontal scaling and the fine-grained resource control of vertical scaling, we developed two novel hybrid autoscaling algorithms and a dedicated network scaling algorithm and benchmarked them against Google's popular Kubernetes horizontal autoscaling algorithm. Results indicated up to 1.49x speedups in response times for our hybrid algorithms, and 1.69x speedups for our network algorithm under high-burst network loads.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".