Science China Information Sciences

, Volume 57, Issue 10, pp 1–16 | Cite as

MABP: an optimal resource allocation approach in data center networks

Research Paper


In data center networks, resource allocation based on workload is an effective way to allocate the infrastructure resources to diverse cloud applications and satisfy the quality of service for the users, which refers to mapping a large number of workloads provided by cloud users/tenants to substrate network provided by cloud providers. Although the existing heuristic approaches are able to find a feasible solution, the quality of the solution is not guaranteed. Concerning this issue, based on the minimum mapping cost, this paper solves the resource allocation problem by modeling it as a distributed constraint optimization problem. Then an efficient approach is proposed to solve the resource allocation problem, aiming to find a feasible solution and ensuring the optimality of the solution. Finally, theoretical analysis and extensive experiments have demonstrated the effectiveness and efficiency of our proposed approach.


data center network resource allocation workload substrate network optimality distributed constraint optimization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Shieh A, Kandula S, Greenberg A, et al. Sharing the data center network. In: Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, Boston, 2011. 22–30Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guo C, Lu G, Wang H, et al. Secondnet: a data center network virtualization architecture with bandwidth guarantees. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Philadelphia, 2010. 7–14Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gar_nkel S. An evaluation of amazons grid computing services: EC2, S3, and SQS. Center for Citeseer, 2007Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang G, Ng T. The impact of virtualization on network performance of amazon EC2 data center. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, San Diego, 2010. 1–9Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bansal N, Lee K, Nagarajan V, et al. Minimum congestion mapping in a cloud. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, San Jose, 2011. 267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta A, Kleinberg J, Kumar A, et al. Provisioning a virtual private network: a network design problem for multicommodity flow. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing, Creta, 2001. 389–398Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yu M, Yi Y, Rexford J, et al. Rethinking virtual network embedding: substrate support for path splitting and migration. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev, 2008, 38: 17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhu Y, Ammar M. Algorithms for assigning substrate network resources to virtual network components. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, Barcelona, 2006. 12–24Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lu J, Turner J. Efficient Mapping of Virtual Networks onto a Shared Substrate. Technical Report, Washington University in St. Louis, 2006Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fan J, Ammar M. Dynamic topology configuration in service overlay networks: a study of reconfiguration policies. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, Barcelona, 2006. 1–12Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheng X, Su S, Zhang Z, et al. Virtual network embedding through topology-aware node ranking. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev, 2011, 41: 38–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Houidi I, Louati W, Zeghlache D. A distributed virtual network mapping algorithm. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications, Beijing, 2008. 5634–5640Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ricci R, Alfeld C, Lepreau J. A solver for the network testbed mapping problem. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev, 2003, 33: 65–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lischka J, Karl H. A virtual network mapping algorithm based on subgraph isomorphism detection. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM Workshop on Virtualized Infrastructure Systems and Architectures, Barcelona, 2009. 81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chowdhury N, Rahman M, Boutaba R. Virtual network embedding with coordinated node and link mapping. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, Rio de Janeiro, 2009. 783–791Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Modi P, Shen W, Tambe M, et al. Adopt: asynchronous distributed constraint optimization with quality guarantees. Artif Intell, 2005, 161: 149–180CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petcu A. A class of algorithms for distributed constraint optimization. Dissertation of Doctoral Degree. Ecole Polytechnique Federale De Lausanne, 2007Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hirayama K, Yokoo M. An approach to overconstrained distributed constraint satisfaction problems: distributed hierarchical constraint satisfaction. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Multiagent Systems, Boston, 2000. 135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • XiaoLing Li
    • 1
  • HuaiMin Wang
    • 1
  • Bo Ding
    • 1
  • XiaoYong Li
    • 1
  1. 1.National Key Laboratory for Parallel and Distributed Processing, School of ComputerNational University of Defense TechnologyChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations