Advertisement

Problems for Resource Brokering in Large and Dynamic Grid Environments

  • Catalin L. Dumitrescu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4128)

Abstract

Running workloads in a Grid environment may become a challenging problem when no appropriate means are available for resource brokering. Many times resources are provided under various administrative policies and agreements that must be known in order to perform adequate scheduling decisions. Thus, providing suitable solutions for resource management is important if we want to cope with the increased scale and complexity of such distributed system. In this paper we explore the key requirements a brokering infrastructure must meet in large and dynamic Grid environments and illustrate how these requirements are addressed by a specialized infrastructure, DI-GRUBER – a distributed usage service level agreement (uSLA) brokering service. The accuracy function of the brokering infrastructure connectivity and the performance gains when a client scheduling policy is employed are analyzed in high detail. In addition, a performance comparison with a P2P-based distributed lookup service is performed to illustrate the performance differences between two different technologies that address similar problems (Grids that focus on federated resource sharing scenarios and P2Ps that focus on self-organizing distributed resource sharing systems, in which most of the communication is symmetric).

Keywords

Decision Point Grid Environment Resource Broker Globus Toolkit Rendezvous Point 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lupu, E.: A Role-based Framework for Distributed Systems Management, in Department of Computing. University of London, London (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dan, A., et al.: Web Services on Demand: WSLA-driven automated management. S. Journal, 136 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dumitrescu, C., Foster, I.: Usage Policy-based CPU Sharing in Virtual Organizations. In: 5th International Workshop in Grid Computing, Pittsburgh (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dumitrescu, C., Wilde, M., Foster, I.: A Model for Usage Policy-based Resource Allocation in Grids. In: 6th IEEE International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY 2005), Stockholm, Sweden (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pearlman, L., et al.: A Community Authorization Service for Group Collaboration. In: IEEE 3rd International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Czajkowski, K., et al.: Grid Information Services for Distributed Resource Sharing. In: 10th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rowstron, A.I.T., Druschel, P.: Storage Management and Caching in PAST, a Large-Scale, Persistent P2P Storage Utility. In: Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ludwig, H., et al.: A Service Level Agreement Language for Dynamic Electronic Services. IBM Research Report RC22316 (W0201-112) (January 24, 2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Foster, I., Dumitrescu, C.L.: GRUBER: A Grid Resource Usage SLA Broker. In: Cunha, J.C., Medeiros, P.D. (eds.) Euro-Par 2005. LNCS, vol. 3648, pp. 465–474. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dumitrescu, C., Raicu, I., Foster, I.: DI-GRUBER: A Distributed Approach for Grid Resource Brokering. In: Super Computing (SC 2005), Seattle (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Foster, I., et al.: The Grid2003 Production Grid: Principles and Practice. In: IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dumitrescu, C., Raicu, I., Foster, I.: Experiences in Running Workloads over Grid3. In: Zhuge, H., Fox, G.C. (eds.) GCC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3795, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    LHC Computing Project (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Humphrey, M., G.W., Jackson, K., Boverhof, J., Rodriguez, M., Bester, J., Gawor, J., Lang, S., Foster, I., Meder, S., Pickles, S., McKeown, M.: State and Events for Web Services: A Comparison of Five WS-Resource Framework and WS-Notification Implementations. In: 4th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing (HPDC-14), July 24-27, 2005, NC (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chun, B., D.C., Roscoe, T., Bavier, A., Peterson, L., Wawrzoniak, M., Bowman, M.: PlanetLab: An Overlay Testbed for Broad-Coverage Services. ACM Computer Communications Review 33(3) (July 2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dumitrescu, C., et al.: DiPerF: Automated DIstributed PERformance testing Framework. In: 5th International Workshop in Grid Computing, Pittsburgh (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catalin L. Dumitrescu
    • 1
  1. 1.CoreGRID Institute on Resource Management and Scheduling, Electrical Eng., Math. and Computer ScienceDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations