Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scalable and automatic virtual machines placement based on behavioral similarities

  • Published:
Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The success of the cloud computing paradigm is leading to a significant growth in size and complexity of cloud data centers. This growth exacerbates the scalability issues of the Virtual Machines (VMs) placement problem, that assigns VMs to the physical nodes of the infrastructure. This task can be modeled as a multi-dimensional bin-packing problem, with the goal to minimize the number of physical servers (for economic and environmental reasons), while ensuring that each VM can access the resources required in the next future. Unfortunately, the naïve bin packing problem applied to a real data center is not solvable in a reasonable time because the high number of VMs and of physical nodes makes the problem computationally unmanageable. Existing solutions improve scalability at the expense of solution quality, resulting in higher costs and heavier environmental footprint. The Class-Based placement technique (CBP) is a novel approach that exploits existing solutions to automatically group VMs showing similar behaviour. The Class-Based technique solves a placement problem that considers only some representative VMs for each class, and that can be replicated as a building block to solve the global VMs placement problem. Using real traces, we analyse our proposal performance, comparing different alternatives to automatically determine the number of building blocks. Furthermore, we compare our proposal against the existing alternatives and evaluate the results for different workload compositions. We demonstrate that the CBP proposal outperforms existing solutions in terms of scalability and VM placement quality.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/.

  2. http://www.ibm.com/software/commerce/optimization/cplex-optimizer/.

References

  1. Gantz J, Reinsel D (2012) The digital universe in 2020: big data, bigger digital shadows, and biggest growth in the far east. IDC iView IDC Anal Future 2007:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  2. EPA (2011) Data center consolidation plan, US Environmental Protection Agency, Tech. Rep

  3. Zhang Q, Cheng L, Boutaba R (2010) Cloud computing: state-of-the-art and research challenges. J Internet Serv Appl 1(1):7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Setzer T, Bichler M (2013) Using matrix approximation for high-dimensional discrete optimization problems: server consolidation based on cyclic time-series data. Eur J Oper Res 227(1):62–75

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Speitkamp B, Bichler M (2010) A mathematical programming approach for server consolidation problems in virtualized data centers. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 3(4):266–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rochwerger B, Breitgand D, Epstein A, Hadas D, Loy I, Nagin K, Tordsson J, Ragusa C, Villari M, Clayman S et al (2011) Reservoir—when one cloud is not enough. IEEE Comput 44(3):44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mills K, Filliben J, Dabrowski C (2011) Comparing VM-placement algorithms for on-demand clouds. In: Proc. of IEEE 3rd International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom), Athens, Greece

  8. Tang C, Steinder M, Spreitzer M, Pacifici G (2007) A scalable application placement controller for enterprise data centers. In: Proc. of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), Banff, Alberta, Canada

  9. Barroso LA, Hölzle U (2007) The case for energy-proportional computing. IEEE Comput 40(12):33–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Setzer T, Stage A (2010) Decision support for virtual machine reassignments in enterprise data centers. In: Proc. of Network Operations and Management Symposium, Osaka, Japan

  11. Wäscher G, Haußner H, Schumann H (2007) An improved typology of cutting and packing problems. Eur J Oper Res 183(3):1109–1130

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kao M (2008) Encyclopedia of algorithms.Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc

  13. Canali C, Lancellotti R (2013) Automatic virtual machine clustering based on Bhattacharyya distance for multi-cloud systems. In: Proc. of International Workshop on Multi-cloud Applications and Federated Clouds (MultiCloud, Prague, Czech Republic

  14. Canali C, Lancellotti R (2014) Improving scalability of cloud monitoring through PCA-based clustering of virtual machines. J Comput Sci Technol 29(1):38–52

  15. Canali C, Lancellotti R (2014) An adaptive technique to model virtual machine behavior for scalable cloud monitoring. In: Proc. of IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC), Madeira, Portugal

  16. Canali C, Lancellotti R (2015) Exploiting classes of virtual machines for scalable IaaS cloud management. In: Proc. of the 4th Symposium on Network Cloud Computing and Applications (NCCA), Munich, Germany

  17. Rabinovich M, Spatscheck O (2002) Web caching and replication. Addison-Wesley Boston, USA, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  18. Iyengar AK, Squillante MS, Zhang L (1999) Analysis and characterization of large-scale Web server access patterns and performance. World Wide Web 2(1–2):85–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Casolari S, Colajanni M (2010) On the selection of models for runtime prediction of system resources. In: Ardagna D, Zhang L (eds) Run-time models for self-managing systems and applications, ser. Autonomic Systems. Springer, pp. 25–44

  20. Mastroianni C, Meo M, Papuzzo G (2013) Probabilistic consolidation of virtual machines in self-organizing cloud data centers. IEEE Trans Cloud Comput 1(2):215–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fang W, Liang X, Li S, Chiaraviglio L, Xiong N (2013) VMPlanner: optimizing virtual machine placement and traffic flow routing to reduce network power costs in cloud data centers. Comput Netw 57(1):179–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang R, Routray R, Eyers DM, Chambliss D, Sarkar P, Willcocks D, Pietzuch P (2011) IO Tetris: deep storage consolidation for the cloud via fine-grained workload analysis. In: Proc. of 4th IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, (CLOUD), Washington, DC, USA

  23. Andreolini M, Casolari S, Colajanni M (2008) Models and framework for supporting runtime decisions in Web-based systems. ACM Trans Web 2(3):1–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Addis B, Ardagna D, Panicucci B, Squillante M, Zhang L (2013) A hierarchical approach for the resource management of very large cloud platforms. IEEE Trans Depend Secure Comput 10(5):253–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Stillwell M, Schanzenbach D, Vivien F, Casanova H (2010) Resource allocation algorithms for virtualized service hosting platforms. J Parallel Distrib Comput 70(9):962–974

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Addis B, Ardagna D, Panicucci B, Squillante MS, Zhang L (2013) A hierarchical approach for the resource management of very large cloud platforms. IEEE Trans Depend Secure Comput 10(5):253–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Epstein L, Favrholdt L, Kohrt J (2012) Comparing online algorithms for bin packing problems. J Sched 15(1):13–21

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhang L, Ardagna D (2004) SLA based profit optimization in autonomic computing systems. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC), New York, NY, USA

  29. Zhu X, Young D, Watson B, Wang Z, Rolia J, Singhal S, McKee B, Hyser C, Gmach D, Gardner R, Christian T, Cherkasova L (2009) 1000 islands: an integrated approach to resource management for virtualized data centers. J Cluster Comput 12(1):45–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Faroe O, Pisinger D, Zachariasen M (2003) Guided local search for the three-dimensional bin-packing problem. Inf J Comput 15(3):267–283

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Crainic TG, Perboli G, Tadei R (2009) Ts 2 pack: a two-level tabu search for the three-dimensional bin packing problem. Eur J Oper Res 195(3):744–760

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Engineering “Enzo Ferrari”, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy

    Claudia Canali & Riccardo Lancellotti

Authors
  1. Claudia Canali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Riccardo Lancellotti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Lancellotti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Canali, C., Lancellotti, R. Scalable and automatic virtual machines placement based on behavioral similarities. Computing 99, 575–595 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-016-0498-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-016-0498-5

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation