Categorization of Intercloud users and auto-scaling of resources

  • Tamanna JenaEmail author
  • J. R. Mohanty
  • Suresh Chandra Satapathy
Special Issue


Optimal allocation of resources in Intercloud computing is NP-complete program. Constraints are many and configuration of each cloud varies from each other. The mapping of the tasks to available virtual machines is challenging. In real life scenarios customer requirements may change. The complexity of the problem increases as requirement changes in terms of capacity, speed and time. To tide overfrequent changes in customer requirement and optimum utilization of available resources, a heuristic algorithm is proposed which will fit to the specification. The proposed algorithm is primarily divided into three phases, namely categorization of users, genetic algorithm-based resource allocation and earliest deadline first scheduling. The objective is to map the tasks to be executed to available VMs of the multi-cloud federation in order to have minimum makespan time and maximum customer satisfaction. After pr simulation on synthetic data, compared the simulation results with the existing scheduling algorithm. Results of the simulation confirm that the proposed categorization of the user in cloud domain can be beneficial in many folds and can address the existing challenges as per concerned metrics.


Categorization Intercloud computing Genetic algorithm Resource allocation Pricing 



  1. 1.
    Sotomayor B, Montero RS, Llorente IM, Foster I (2009) Virtual infrastructure management in private and hybrid clouds. IEEE Internet Comput 13(5):14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buyya R, Ranjan R, Calheiros RN. Intercloud: utility-oriented federation of cloud computing environments for scaling of application services. In: InInternational Conference on Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing 2010 May 21 (pp. 13–31). Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aoyama T, Sakai H (2011) Inter-cloud-computing. Wirtschaftsinformatik 53(3):171–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grozev N, Buyya R (2014) Inter-Cloud architectures and application brokering: taxonomy and survey. Softw Pract Exp 44(3):369–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brookbanks MD, Coffey BF, Dawson CJ, Nellutla T, Patterson RC, Seaman JW, Inventors; International Business Machines Corp, assignee (2011 ) Inter-cloud resource sharing within a cloud computing environment. United States patent application US 12/630,079. Jun 9Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sotiriadis S, Bessis N, Antonopoulos N (2011) Towards inter-cloud schedulers: a survey of meta-scheduling approaches. In: P2P, parallel, grid, cloud and internet computing (3PGCIC), 2011 International Conference on 2011 Oct 26 (pp. 59–66). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jena T, Mohanty JR (2017) GA-based customer-conscious resource allocation and task scheduling in multi-cloud computing. Arab J Sci Eng.43:1–16Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li K, Mei J, Li K (2016) A fund-constrained investment scheme for profit maximization in cloud computing. IEEE Trans Serv Comput. Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pande SK, Panda SK, Das S (2016) A customer-oriented task scheduling for heterogeneous multi-cloud environment. Int J Cloud Appl Comput 6(4):1–7Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu C, Li K, Li K, Buyya R (2017) A new cloud service mechanism for profit optimizations of a cloud provider and its users. IEEE Trans Cloud Comput. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li K, Liu C, Li K, Zomaya AY (2016) A framework of price bidding configurations for resource usage in cloud computing. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 27(8):2168–2181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bonacquisto P, Di Modica G, Petralia G, Tomarchio O (2014) A strategy to optimize resource allocation in auction-based cloud markets. In: IEEE international conference on services computing, Anchorage, AK, USA, 27 June–2 July 2014. IEEE, pp 339–346Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu C, Li K, Xu C, Li K (2016) Strategy configurations of multiple users competition for cloud service reservation. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 27(2):508–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jena T, Mohanty JR (2016) Disaster recovery services in intercloud using genetic algorithm load balancer. Int J Electr Comput Eng 6(4):2088–8708Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ge Y, Wei G. GA-based task scheduler for the cloud computing systems. In: web information systems and mining (WISM), 2010 International Conference on 2010 Oct 23 (Vol. 2, pp. 181–186). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jang SH, Kim TY, Kim JK, Lee JS (2012 Dec) The study of genetic algorithm-based task scheduling for cloud computing. Int J Control Autom 5(4):157–162Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao C, Zhang S, Liu Q, Xie J, Hu J (2009) Independent tasks scheduling based on genetic algorithm in cloud computing. In: wireless communications, networking and mobile computing, WiCom’09. 5th international conference on 2009 Sep 24 (pp. 1–4). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaur S, Verma A (2012 Sep) An efficient approach to genetic algorithm for task scheduling in cloud computing environment. IJ Inf Technol Comput Sci 10:74–79):14Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dasgupta K, Mandal B, Dutta P, Mandal JK, Dam S (2013) A genetic algorithm (ga) based load balancing strategy for cloud computing. Proc Technol 1(10):340–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rao KT (2018) Client-awareness resource allotment and job scheduling in heterogeneous cloud by using social group optimization. Int J Nat Comput Res 7(1):15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dayananda Sagar UniversityBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.KIIT UniversityBhubaneswarIndia

Personalised recommendations