MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Characterizing network performance of single-node large-scale container deployments

2021· article· en· W4200359031 on OpenAlexaff
Conrado Boeira, Miguel Neves, Tiago Ferreto, Israat Haque

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroservicesComputer scienceCloud computingComputer networkDistributed computingScheduling (production processes)Network packetNode (physics)Quality of serviceThroughputContainer (type theory)Operating systemWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud services have shifted from complex monolithic designs to hundreds of loosely coupled microservices over the last years. These microservices communicate via pre-defined APIs (e.g., RPC) and are usually implemented on top of containers. To make the microservices model profitable, cloud providers often co-locate them on a single (virtual) machine, thus achieving high server utilization. Despite being overlooked by previous work, the challenge of providing high-quality network connectivity to multiple containers running on the same host becomes crucial for the overall cloud service performance in this scenario. For that reason, this paper focuses on identifying the overheads and bottlenecks caused by the increasing number of concurrent containers running on a single node, particularly from a networking perspective. Through an extensive set of experiments, we show that the networking performance is mostly restricted by the CPU capacity (even for I/O intensive workloads), that containers can largely suffer from interference originated from packet processing, and that proper core scheduling policies can significantly improve connection throughput. Ultimately, our findings can help to pave the way towards more efficient large-scale microservice deployments.

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 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 score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207