In cloud, do MTC or HTC service providers benefit from the economies of scale?

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback
Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

In cloud, do MTC or HTC service providers benefit from the economies of scale?

Full text

Pdf (303 KB)

Source

Conference on High Performance Networking and Computing archive
Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Many-Task Computing on Grids and Supercomputers table of contents

Portland, Oregon

Article No.: 7

Year of Publication: 2009

ISBN:978-1-60558-714-1

Authors

Lei Wang	Chinese Academy of Sciences
Jianfeng Zhan	Chinese Academy of Sciences
Weisong Shi	Wayne State University
Yi Liang	Beijing University of Technology
Lin Yuan	Beijing University of Technology

Sponsors

SIGARCH: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Architecture
: IEEE CS

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 30, Downloads (12 Months): 81, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1646468.1646475 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Cloud computing, which is advocated as an economic platform for daily computing, has become a hot topic for both industrial and academic communities in the last couple of years. The basic idea behind cloud computing is that resource providers, which own the cloud platform, offer elastic resources to end users. In this paper, we intend to answer one key question to the success of cloud computing: in cloud, do many task computing (MTC) or high throughput computing (HTC) service providers, which offer the corresponding computing service to end users, benefit from the economies of scale? To the best of our knowledge, no previous work designs and implements the enabling system to consolidate MTC and HTC workloads on the cloud platform and no one answers the above question. Our research contributions are threefold: first, we propose an innovative usage model, called dynamic service provision (DSP) model, for MTC or HTC service providers. In the DSP model, the resource provider provides the service of creating and managing runtime environments for MTC or HTC service providers, and consolidates heterogeneous MTC or HTC workloads on the cloud platform; second, based on the DSP model, we design and implement Dawningcloud, which provides automatic management for heterogeneous workloads; third, a comprehensive evaluation of Dawningcloud has been performed in an emulatation experiment. We found that for typical workloads, in comparison with the previous two cloud solutions, Dawningcloud saves the resource consumption maximally by 46.4% (HTC) and 74.9% (MTC) for the service providers, and saves the total resource consumption maximally by 29.7% for the resource provider. At the same time, comparing with the traditional solution that provides MTC or HTC services with dedicated systems, Dawningcloud is more cost-effective. To this end, we conclude that for typical MTC and HTC workloads, on the cloud platform, MTC and HTC service providers and the resource service provider can benefit from the economies of scale.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Ioan Raicu, Ian Foster. 2008. Many-Task Computing for Grids and Supercomputers. In Proceedings of the first workshop on Many-Task Computing on Grids and Supercomputers(MTAGS08)
	2	Michael Armbrust, Armando Fox. 2009. Above the clouds: A Berkeley View of cloud Computing. Technical Report.
	3	EC2. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/
	4	XEN. http://www.xensource.com/
	5	Constantinos Evangelinos, Chris Hill. 2008. cloud computing for parallel Scientific HPC Applications: Feasibility of running Coupled Atmosphere-Ocean Climate Models on Amazon's EC2. In Proceedings of the first workshop on cloud Computing and its Applications(CCA08)
	6	Luis M. Vaquero , Luis Rodero-Merino , Juan Caceres , Maik Lindner, A break in the clouds: towards a cloud definition, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, v.39 n.1, January 2009 [doi>10.1145/1496091.1496100]
	7	Simson Garfinkel. 2007. Commodity Grid Computing with Amazon's S3 and EC2. Login: The USENIX Magazine, February 2007, Volume 32, Number 1.
	8	Benny Rochwerger, David Breitgand. 2009. The Reservoir model and architecture for open federated cloud computing. IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 53, No. 4, 2009.
	9	Mayur R. Palankar , Adriana Iamnitchi , Matei Ripeanu , Simson Garfinkel, Amazon S3 for science grids: a viable solution?, Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Data-aware distributed computing, p.55-64, June 24-24, 2008, Boston, MA, USA [doi>10.1145/1383519.1383526]
	10	Ewa Deelman , Gurmeet Singh , Miron Livny , Bruce Berriman , John Good, The cost of doing science on the cloud: the Montage example, Proceedings of the 2008 ACM/IEEE conference on Supercomputing, November 15-21, 2008, Austin, Texas
	11	Derrick Kondo , Bahman Javadi , Paul Malecot , Franck Cappello , David P. Anderson, Cost-benefit analysis of Cloud Computing versus desktop grids, Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Parallel&Distributed Processing, p.1-12, May 23-29, 2009 [doi>10.1109/IPDPS.2009.5160911]
	12	Jianfeng Zhan. 2008. Phoenix cloud: Consolidating Different Computing Loads on Shared Cluster System for Large Organization. In Proceedings of the first workshop on cloud Computing and its Applications(CCA08)
	13	David Irwin , Jeffrey Chase , Laura Grit , Aydan Yumerefendi , David Becker , Kenneth G. Yocum, Sharing networked resources with brokered leases, Proceedings of the annual conference on USENIX '06 Annual Technical Conference, p.18-18, May 30-June 03, 2006, Boston, MA
	14	Top500. http://www.top500.org/lists/2008/11
	15	WorkflowGenerator: http://vtcpc.isi.edu/pegasus/index.php/WorkflowGenerator
	16	Kris Gaj , Tarek A. El-Ghazawi , Nikitas A. Alexandridis , Frederic Vroman , Nguyen Nguyen , Jacek R. Radzikowski , Preeyapong Samipagdi , Suboh A. Suboh, Performance Evaluation of Selected Job Management Systems, Proceedings of the 16th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, p.260, April 15-19, 2002
	17	Parallel Workloads Archive: http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/labs/parallel/workload/
	18	RightScale: http://www.rightscale.com/
	19	Miron Livny, Jim Basney. 1997. Mechanisms for High Throughput Computing, SPEEDUP Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, June 1997.
	20	Laura E. Grit , Jeffrey S. Chase, Weighted fair sharing for dynamic virtual clusters, Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMETRICS international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems, June 02-06, 2008, Annapolis, MD, USA [doi>10.1145/1375457.1375521]
	21	Jianfeng Zhan, Lei Wang, Weisong Shi et al. 2009. PhoenixCloud: Provisioning Heterogeneous Runtime Environments for cloud Computing. ICT Technical Report.
	22	Mark Dan, Dan Geiger. 2006. Scheduling Mixed Workloads in Multi-grids: The Grid Execution Hierarchy. In Proceedings of 15th HPDC, pp. 291--302.
	23	Montage Project: http://montage.ipac.caltech.edu.
	24	Jianfeng Zhan , Gengpu Liu , Lei Wang , Bibo Tu , Yi Jin , Yang Li , Yan Hao , Xuehai Hong , Dan Meng , Ninghui Sun, PhoenixG: A Unified Management Framework for Industrial Information Grid, Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, p.489-496, May 16-19, 2006 [doi>10.1109/CCGRID.2006.79]