MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404788249 · doi:10.1145/3652892.3700777

Ripple: Large-Scale Service and Configuration Management in the Cloud

2024· article· en· W4404788249 on OpenAlexaff
Shuping Ji, Zhen Tang, Wei Wang, Hui Li, Jianguo Yao, Hans‐Arno Jacobsen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceScale (ratio)Service (business)BusinessOperating systemPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microservice architectures backed by container technology have been widely used in many real-world cloud-native applications. By enabling customers to manage their services and configurations in the cloud in a centralized, externalized, and dynamic manner, efficient service and configuration management plays a fundamental role in building cloud-native service-centric applications. The number of containers in cloud data centers continues to increase. For example, in the Alibaba Cloud, the number of containers reached hundreds of thousands by 2023 and is expected to reach several million soon. At this scale, existing service and configuration management solutions have limited efficiency, scalability and robustness. Other related approaches, such as message bus systems and publish/subscribe (pub/sub for short) systems, also do not work well for large-scale service and configuration management in the cloud, as their designs are more general purpose directed. To overcome these limitations, we design a system, called Ripple, that uniquely combines several existing and some novel features such as consistent hashing-based workload distribution, dynamic destination list-based and client-assisted message delivery, incremental update, and adaptive load balancing. Approaches exhibiting these features have not been well investigated in the domain of service and configuration management. We compare our proposed solution with existing academic and industrial approaches. The experiments show that our solution greatly outperforms its counterparts. For example, for the same workload, when Ripple is used, the average message delivery latency and network bandwidth consumption can be reduced by up to 77% and 93%, respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207