The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Efficient Autoscaling in the Cloud Using Predictive Models for Workload Forecasting
Abstract
Large-scale component-based enterprise applications that leverage Cloud resources expect Quality of Service(QoS) guarantees in accordance with service level agreements between the customer and service providers. In the context of Cloud computing, auto scaling mechanisms hold the promise of assuring QoS properties to the applications while simultaneously making efficient use of resources and keeping operational costs low for the service providers. Despite the perceived advantages of auto scaling, realizing the full potential of auto scaling is hard due to multiple challenges stemming from the need to precisely estimate resource usage in the face of significant variability in client workload patterns. This paper makes three contributions to overcome the general lack of effective techniques for workload forecasting and optimal resource allocation. First, it discusses the challenges involved in auto scaling in the cloud. Second, it develops a model-predictive algorithm for workload forecasting that is used for resource auto scaling. Finally, empirical results are provided that demonstrate that resources can be allocated and deal located by our algorithm in a way that satisfies both the application QoS while keeping operational costs low.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Elasticity in Cloud Computing: State of the Art and Research Challenges
Al-Dhuraibi, Y., Paraiso, F., Djarallah, N., & Merle, P. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Services Computing · doi:10.1109/tsc.2017.2711009 · Cited by 409
Autopilot: workload autoscaling at Google
Rzadca, K., Findeisen, P., Swiderski, J., Zych, P., Broniek, P., Kusmierek, J., Nowak, P., Strack, B., Witusowski, P., Hand, S., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the Fifteenth European Conference on Computer Systems · doi:10.1145/3342195.3387524 · Cited by 303
A novel VM workload prediction using Grey Forecasting model in cloud data center
Jheng, J.-J., Tseng, F.-H., Chao, H.-C., & Chou, L.-D. (2014) · The International Conference on Information Networking 2014 (ICOIN2014) · doi:10.1109/icoin.2014.6799662 · Cited by 50
Rapid and accurate energy models through calibration with IPMI and RAPL
Kavanagh, R., & Djemame, K. (2019) · Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience · doi:10.1002/cpe.5124 · Cited by 23
KSwSVR: A New Load Forecasting Method for Efficient Resources Provisioning in Cloud
Hu, R., Jiang, J., Liu, G., & Wang, L. (2013) · 2013 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing · doi:10.1109/scc.2013.67 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Roy, N., Dubey, A., & Gokhale, A.
- Venue
- 2011 IEEE 4th International Conference on Cloud Computing
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2011-07
- Pages
- 500-507
- ISSN
- 2159-6190 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2115743854
- Cited by
- 591
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 20.67
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.