MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reviving Software Diversity in Microservices to Optimize the Performance of Software Systems

2023· article· en· W4389576356 on OpenAlexaff
Prabjot Dhaliwal, Hamzeh Khazaei

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMicroservicesSoftware versioningSoftware engineeringSoftwareSoftware systemService (business)Agile software developmentOperating systemCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing popularity and complexity of microservice software systems, satisfying the performance requirements of these systems becomes a non-trivial task. While horizontal auto-scaling is a common remedy to this problem, it is not necessarily cost-effective and the proper solution for all scenarios. Also, regardless of the number of replicas, they are all prone to common bug failure. In this poster/demo, we present an agile and cost-effective approach for satisfying the performance requirements of microservice software systems without incurring extra costs on the service provider. We research how performance, i.e., response time, can be tamed by applying software diversity, aka multi-versioning, to the system's resource-heavy critical services. We use our open-source extension of the Docker framework, called DockerMV, to deploy microservice systems with multi-versioning embedded underneath. We also propose a dynamic load-balancing service that proactively adapts to the various versions depending on current and near-future performance needs. We demonstrate the efficacy of multi-versioning for satisfying the performance requirements of microservice software systems through extensive experiments on TeaStore, a microservice reference test application, and Znn, a containerized news portal. We will present our results through the poster and a live demonstration throughout the conference. A preliminary demo of our work can be accessed here11https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMCxlDtU64. The GitHub repository of our work can be accessed here22https://github.com/prabjot09/nginx-dynamic-load-balancing.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207