A modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm for scientific workflow scheduling using clustering techniques
- 6 Downloads
The scientific workflows in the field of science like biology and astronomy are essential in facilitating and automating the scientific data of high volumes and their processing especially in a computing structure that is large. Owing to the large need for resources, a public heterogeneous cloud tends to play a major role in the completion of tasks. The traditional researches falling into the scheduling workflows in cloud applications were focusing on the problems that have a quality of service that is not sufficient for the competitive environment that exists today. There are scientific workflows that consist of several granular tasks which are intensive in terms of data. For a computational granularity that is efficient, the task clustering has a major role to play in reducing the length of the schedule and the utilization of resources. The workflow scheduling is a prominent issue in cloud computing, and this makes an attempt to map workflow tasks to VMs on the basis of various functional needs. The very popular approaches to this are either the static or the dynamic scheduling algorithms that have been based on various heuristics like the Opportunistic Load Balancing (OLB). But, in the case of workflow scheduling, this becomes a non-deterministic polynomial-hard optimization and is a challenge to achieve within an optimal schedule. The proposed work is a vertical node partition that makes use the vertical node partition that make use of a heuristic and novel shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA) technique of clustering for optimal scheduling of scientific workflow. The results of the technique have shown that the SFLA proposed along with the method of clustering has achieved better performance (in terms of makespan and utilization of resources) compared to the SFLA and the OLB without clustering.
KeywordsCloud computing Scientific workflow Scheduling Virtualization Load balancing Clustering and shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA)
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Angayarkanni G (2017) A survey on load balancing in cloud computing using various algorithms. Int J Adv Netw Appl (IJANA) 8(5):67–71Google Scholar
- Arjmand S, Adibnia F (2016) Job scheduling in cloud environment based on shuffled frog leaping algorithm. Int J Human Cult Stud (IJHCS) 1(1):290–302Google Scholar
- Bilgaiyan S, Sagnika S, Das M (2014) Workflow scheduling in cloud computing environment using cat swarm optimization. In: 2014 IEEE international advance computing conference (IACC). IEEE, pp 680–685Google Scholar
- Chen W, Deelman E (2012) Workflowsim: a toolkit for simulating scientific workflows in distributed environments. In: 2012 IEEE 8th international conference on e-science. IEEE, pp 1–8Google Scholar
- Guo X (2018) Research on optimization strategy of virtual resource scheduling based on improved frog leaping algorithm. In: 2017 international conference advanced engineering and technology research (AETR 2017). Atlantis PressGoogle Scholar
- Hu X (2015) Adaptive optimization of cloud security resource dispatching SFLA algorithm. Int J Eng Sci (IJES) 4(3):39–43Google Scholar
- Kashyap D, Viradiya J (2014) A survey of various load balancing algorithms in cloud computing. Int J Sci Technol Res 3(11):115–119Google Scholar
- Kaur R, Luthra P (2013) Load balancing in cloud computing. Int J Netw Security 1–11Google Scholar
- Krishna MV (2018) An effective analysis of Metaheuristic optimization algorithms for scheduling in Cloud Computing. Int J Manag Technol Eng 8(12):2677–2687Google Scholar
- Moharana SS, Ramesh RD, Powar D (2013) Analysis of load balancers in cloud computing. Int J Comput Sci Eng (IJCSE) 2(2):101–108Google Scholar
- Nema L, Sharma A, Jain S (2016) Load balancing algorithms in cloud computing: an extensive survey. Int J Eng Sci Comput 6(6):7463–7468Google Scholar
- Pandey S, Wu L, Guru SM, Buyya R (2010) A particle swarm optimization-based heuristic for scheduling workflow applications in cloud computing environments. In: 2010 24th IEEE international conference on advanced information networking and applications. IEEE, pp 400–407Google Scholar
- Shaw SB, Singh AK (2014) A survey on scheduling and load balancing techniques in cloud computing environment. In: 2014 international conference on computer and communication technology (ICCCT). IEEE, pp 87–95Google Scholar
- Sumathi D, Poongodi P (2015) An improved scheduling strategy in cloud using trust based mechanism. Int J Comput Electr Autom Control Inf Eng 9(2):637–641Google Scholar
- Swarnkar N, Singh APAK, Shankar R (2013) A survey of load balancing techniques in cloud computing. Int J Eng Res Technol (IJERT) 2(8):800–804Google Scholar
- Thant PT, Powell C, Schlueter M, Munetomo M (2017a) Multiobjective level-wise scientific workflow optimization in IaaS public cloud environment. In: Scientific programming, 2017Google Scholar
- Thant PT, Powell C, Schlueter M, Munetomo M (2017b) Constrained multi-objective scientific workflow execution optimization with NSGA-III in the Cloud. IJCSIS 15(10)Google Scholar
- Thant PT, Powell C, Schlueter M, Munetomo M (2017c) A level-wise load balanced scientific workflow execution optimization using NSGA-II. In: 2017 17th IEEE/ACM international symposium on cluster, cloud and grid computing (CCGRID). IEEE, pp 882–889Google Scholar
- Wu Z, Ni Z, Gu L, Liu X (2010) A revised discrete particle swarm optimization for cloud workflow scheduling. In: 2010 international conference on computational intelligence and security. IEEE, pp 184–188Google Scholar
- Yang M, Gao X, Cao Y, Liu Y, Li Y (2015) Resource scheduling of workflow multi-instance migration based on the shuffled leapfrog algorithm. J Ind Eng Manag (JIEM) 8(1):217–232Google Scholar