Efficient Resource Utilization by Reducing Broker Cost Using Multi-objective Optimization

  • B. K. DhanalakshmiEmail author
  • K. C. Srikantaiah
  • K. R. Venugopal
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 771)


Cloud computing is largely concerned with effective resource utilization and cost optimization. In the existing system, however, resources are under-utilized due to high cost. To overcome with this problem, in this chapter a new classification and merging model for reducing broker cost (CMRBC) is introduced to enable effective resource utilization and cost optimization in the cloud. CMRBC has enormous benefits. First, it has a cost-effective solution for service providers and customers. Second, for every job, virtual machine (VM) creation is avoided to reduce broker cost. Because of allocation, the creation or selection of VM resources is done based on the broker. Thus, CMRBC implements an efficient system of resource allocation that reduces resource usage cost. Our experimental results show that CMRBC achieves greater than 40% reduction in broker cost and 10% in response time.


Broker cost Cloud computing Classification Cost effectiveness Merging Multi-objective optimization Resource utilization Scheduling 


  1. 1.
    Cloud, C. 2009. Amazon elastic compute cloud.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guide, D. 2010. Amazon elastic mapreduce.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Palanisamy, B., A. Singh, L. Liu and B. Langston. 2013. Cura: A cost-optimized model for mapreduce in a cloud. In IEEE 27th International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing (IPDPS), pp. 1275–1286. IEEE.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Singh, A., M. Korupolu, and D. Mohapatra. 2008. Server-storage virtualization: integration and load balancing in data centers. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM/IEEE conference on Supercomputing, p. 53. IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kanu, R.P., T. Shabeera, and S.M. Kumar. 2014. Dynamic cluster configuration algorithm in mapreduce cloud. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies 5 (3): 4028–4033.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kessaci, Y., N. Melab and E.-G. Talbi. 2013. A pareto-based genetic algorithm for optimized assignment of vm requests on a cloud brokering environment. In 2013. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), pp. 2496–2503. IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anastasiadis, S.V., and K.C. Sevcik. 1997. Parallel application scheduling on networks of workstations. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 43 (2): 109–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar, B.S., and L. Parthiban. 2016. A novel approach for submission of tasks to a data center in a virtualized cloud computing environment. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 7 (8): 238–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. K. Dhanalakshmi
    • 1
    Email author
  • K. C. Srikantaiah
    • 1
  • K. R. Venugopal
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSJB Institute of TechnologyBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity Visvesvaraya College of EngineeringBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations