Advertisement

Can Dynamic Provisioning and Rejuvenation Systems Coexist in Peace?

  • Raquel Lopes
  • Walfredo Cirne
  • Francisco Brasileiro
  • Eduardo Colaço
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3775)

Abstract

Dynamic provisioning systems change application capacity in order to use enough resources to accommodate current load. Rejuvenation systems detect/forecast software failures and temporarily remove one or more components of the application in order to bring them to a clean state. Up to now, these systems have been developed unaware of one another. However, many applications need to be controlled by both. In this paper we investigate whether these systems can actuate over the same application when they are not aware of each other, i.e., without coordination. We present and apply a model to study the performance of dynamic provisioning and rejuvenation systems when they actuate over the same application without coordination. Our results show that when both systems coexist application quality of service degrades in comparison with the quality of service provided when each system is acting alone. This suggests that some level of coordination must be added to maximize the benefits gained from the simultaneous use of both systems.

Keywords

Interacting systems dynamic provisioning rejuvenation 

References

  1. 1.
    Ranjan, S., Rolia, J., Fu, H., Knightly, E.: Qos-driven server migration for internet data centers. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Quality of Service, pp. 3–12 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lassettre, E., et al.: Dynamic surge protection: An approach to handling unexpected workload surges with resource actions that have dead times. In: Brunner, M., Keller, A. (eds.) DSOM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2867, pp. 82–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Urgaonkar, B., Shenoy, P.: Cataclysm: Handling extreme overloads in internet applications. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2005) (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garg, S., et al.: Analysis of preventive maintenance in transactions based software systems. IEEE Transactions on Computers 47 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li, L., Vaidyanathan, K., Trivedi, K.S.: An approach for estimation of software aging in a web server. In: International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Candea, G., et al.: Microreboot - a technique for cheap recovery. In: Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hong, Y., Chen, D., Li, L., Trivedi, K.: Closed loop design for software rejuvenation. In: Workshop on Self-Healing, Adaptive, and Self-Managed Systems (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lopes, R., Cirne, W., Brasileiro, F.: Improving dynamic provisioning systems using software restarts. In: Sahai, A., Wu, F. (eds.) DSOM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3278. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson, T. (ed.): Edpendability of Resilient Computers. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Candea, G., Fox, A.: Recursive restartability: Turning the reboot sledgehammer into a scalpel. In: Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems, pp. 125–132 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kant, K., Tewari, V., Iyer, R.: Geist: A generator of e-commerce and internet server traffic. In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, pp. 49–56. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Keralapura, R., Taft, N., Iannaccone, C.N.C.G.: Can isps take the heat from overlay networks? In: ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Narasimhan, P.: Trade-offs between real-time and fault tolerance for middleware applications. In: Workshop on Foundations of Middleware Technologies (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stankovic, J.A., Wang, F.: The integration of scheduling and fault tolerance in real-time systems. Technical report, UM-CS-1992-049, Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts (1992)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Graupner, S., et al.: Impact of virtualization on management systems. Technical report, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mukhopadhyay, S.: Distributed control and distributed computing. SIGAPP Appl. Comput. Rev. 7, 23–24 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mukhopadhyay, S., Narendra, K.S.: Decentralized adaptive control using partial information. In: American Control Conference, vol. 1, pp. 34–38 (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Narendra, K.S., Oleng, N.O.: Decentralized adaptive control. In: American Control Conference, vol. 5, pp. 3407–3412 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raquel Lopes
    • 1
  • Walfredo Cirne
    • 1
  • Francisco Brasileiro
    • 1
  • Eduardo Colaço
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Sistemas e Computação, Laboratório de Sistemas DistribuídosUniversidade Federal de Campina GrandeCampina GrandeBrazil

Personalised recommendations