Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Solutions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Survey on Coordinated Power Management in Multi-Tenant Data Centers

  • 345 Accesses

Abstract

Multi-tenant data center has become large energy consumers due to the increasingly popular cloud computing services. However, their efficiency is lower that of owner-operated data centers. This is due to the split incentives of the stakeholders, i.e., the operator and its tenants, are not aligned. This part of the book explains the motivations, issues, and challenges. Then, it surveys the formulated problems and corresponding proposed solutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The commonly used power-based pricing is considered as the baseline case, and RECO is applied on top of this baseline. Hence, the colocation’s revenue, i.e., tenants’ power-based rent (excluding power-irrelevant bandwidth charges, etc.), is pre-determined.

  2. 2.

    The rental cost is calculated based on pro-rated for 48 h with a rental rate of 147 $/kW per month, considering that Hadoop and KVS tenants have power subscriptions of 240 and 340 W, respectively.

    Fig. 5.24
    figure 24

    Cost savings under different algorithms

    Full size image

References

  1. Equinix Website. [Online]. Available: http://www.equinix.com/.

  2. Gandhi, A., Harchol-Balter, M., Raghunathan, R., & Kozuch, M. A. (2012, November). AutoScale: Dynamic, robust capacity management for multi-tier data centers. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 30(4), 14:1–14:26. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/lxamQz.

  3. Lin, M., Wierman, A., Andrew, L., & Thereska, E. (2011, April). Dynamic right-sizing for power-proportional data centers. In IEEE INFOCOM (pp. 1098–1106). [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/QoqujE.

  4. Xu, H. & Li, B. (2014). Reducing electricity demand charge for data centers with partial execution. In 5th international conference on future energy systems, ser. e-Energy ’14 (pp. 51–61). New York, NY, USA: ACM. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/Li8eq5.

  5. PG&E. Pacific gas and electric company. PG&E Website. [Online]. Available: http://www.pge.com/.

  6. Liu, Z., Wierman, A., Chen, Y., Razon, B., & Chen, N. (2013, June). Data center demand response: Avoiding the coincident peak via workload shifting and local generation. SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 41(1), 341–342. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/rvenlD.

  7. Data Center Map: Colocation, U.S.A.. Data Center Map Website. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/JkV6tg.

  8. Islam, M., Ren, S., & Wang, X. (2014, November). GreenColo: A novel incentive mechanism for minimizing carbon footprint in colocation data center. In International green computing conference, (IGCC) (pp. 1–8). [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/f9nr8F.

  9. Islam, M., Mahmud, H., Ren, S., & Wang, X. (2015, February). Paying to save: Reducing cost of colocation data center via rewards. In IEEE 21st international symposium on high performance computer architecture, (HPCA) (pp. 235–245). [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/G6zoeJ.

  10. Zhang, L., Li, Z., Wu, C., & Ren, S. (2015, December). Online electricity cost saving algorithms for co-location data centers. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 33(12), 2906–2919. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/45QUdf.

  11. Zhang, L., Ren, S., Wu, C., & Li, Z. (2015, April). A truthful incentive mechanism for emergency demand response in colocation data centers. In IEEE INFOCOM, Hong Kong, China (pp. 2632–2640). [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/9KqeBv.

  12. Duke Energy Progress North Carolina Rates & Tariffs. Duke Energy Website. [Online]. Available: http://www.duke-energy.com/.

  13. BC Hydro. Website. [Online]. Available: https://www.bchydro.com/.

  14. Georgia Power: Electric Service Tariff. Website.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mid American Energy Electric Tariffs. Website. [Online]. Available: https://goo.gl/iOGMmw.

  16. Califonia ISO. Califonia ISO Website. [Online]. Available: http://www.caiso.com/.

  17. Mohsenian-Rad, A.-H., Wong, V., Jatskevich, J., Schober, R., & Leon-Garcia, A. (2010, December). Autonomous demand-side management based on game-theoretic energy consumption scheduling for the future smart grid. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 1(3), 320–331. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/rqjo6k.

  18. Wu, Q. (2014, August). Making Facebooks software infrastructure more energy efficient with Autoscale. facebook.com, Tech. Rep. [Online]. Available: https://goo.gl/aQjYl4.

  19. STEM. Demand charges. Website. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/GZXepT.

  20. Thereska, E., Donnelly, A., & Narayanan, D. (2009). Sierra: A power-proportional, distributed storage system. Microsoft Research, Cambridge, U.K., Tech. Rep. [Online]. Available: https://goo.gl/ICu7jt.

  21. Google Transparency Report: Browse real-time traffic to Google products and services. Google Website, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://goo.gl/GQnPhX.

  22. Neely, M. J. (2010, January). Stochastic network optimization with application to communication and queueing systems. Synthesis Lectures on Communication Networks, 3(1), 1–211. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/CZQn2P.

  23. Enaxis Consulting. (2009). Pricing Data Center Co-location Services. Enaxis Consulting. Tech. Rep. [Online]. Available: http://www.enaxisconsulting.com/.

  24. Urdaneta, G., Pierre, G., & van Steen, M. (2009, July). Wikipedia workload analysis for decentralized hosting. Computer Networks, 53(11), 1830–1845. [Online]. Available: https://goo.gl/ttJFmW.

  25. Boyd, S. & Vandenberghe, L. (2004). Convex optimization. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/3YTKaJ.

  26. Carr, R. D., Fleischer, L. K., Leung, V. J., & Phillips, C. A. (2000). Strengthening integrality gaps for capacitated network design and covering problems. In Proceedings of the eleventh annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms, ser. SODA ’00 (pp. 106–115). Philadelphia, PA, USA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/1ohyvw.

  27. Carnes, T. & Shmoys, D. (2008). Primal-dual schema for capacitated covering problems (pp. 288–302). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/7F4KO1.

  28. Lavi, R. & Swamy, C. (2005, October). Truthful and near-optimal mechanism design via linear programming. In 46th annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science (pp. 595–604). [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/aY0rB4.

  29. Carr, R. & Vempala, S. (May 2002). Randomized metarounding. Random Structures & Algorithms, 20(3), 343–352. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/VAEqaa.

  30. Archer, A. & Tardos, E. (2001). Truthful mechanisms for one-parameter agents. In 42nd IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science, ser. FOCS ’01 (pp. 482–491). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society. [Online]. Available: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=874063.875583.

  31. Myerson, R. B. (1981, February). Optimal auction design. Mathematics of Operations Research, 6(1), 58–73. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/moor.6.1.58.

  32. Canadian climate data. (2014). [Online]. Available: http://climate.weather.gc.ca/.

  33. Vasudevan, V., Phanishayee, A., Shah, H., Krevat, E., Andersen, D. G., Ganger, G. R., et al. (2009, August). Safe and effective fine-grained TCP retransmissions for datacenter communication. SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39(4), 303–314. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1594977.1592604.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Yongin, Gyeonggi, Korea (Republic of)

    Thant Zin Oo, Nguyen H. Tran & Choong Seon Hong

  2. Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA

    Shaolei Ren

Authors
  1. Thant Zin Oo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nguyen H. Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shaolei Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Choong Seon Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Oo, T.Z., Tran, N.H., Ren, S., Hong, C.S. (2018). Solutions. In: A Survey on Coordinated Power Management in Multi-Tenant Data Centers. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66062-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66062-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66061-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66062-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation