Energy Efficiency Dilemma: P2P-cloud vs. Datacenter
Open accessAbstract
Energy consumption is increasing in the IT sector and a remarkable part of this energy is consumed in data centers. Numerous techniques have been proposed to solve the energy efficiency issue in cloud systems. Recently, there are some efforts to decentralize the cloud via distributing data centers in diverse geographical positions. In this paper, we elaborate on the energy consumption of different cloud architectures, from a mega-datacenter to a P2P-cloud that provides extreme decentralization in terms of datacenter size. P2P-cloud is defined as a set of commodity host machines, connected to each other to serve a community. Our evaluation results reveal the fact that the more decentralized the system is, the less energy may be consumed in the system. Studying the energy efficiency of P2P-cloud infrastructure shows that the additional system design complexity involved is warranted with improved energy-efficiency and better locality for some services. Our analysis indicates that such P2P-cloud outperforms the classic datacenter model as long as it meets the locality conditions, which are commonplace in communities. Moreover, we illustrate how much energy can be saved for MapReduce applications with a diverse range of specifications by switching to P2P-cloud.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
P2P communications require edge devices to be powered on continuously, which could lead to waste energy.
“P2P communications require edge devices that have to be powered on continuously, which could lead to waste energy [191], [192].”
From A Review on the Use of Blockchain for the Internet of Things (2018) · cites this paper as [192]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Review on the Use of Blockchain for the Internet of Things
Fernandez-Carames, T. M., & Fraga-Lamas, P. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2842685 · Cited by 1,078 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sharifi, L., Rameshan, N., Freitag, F., & Veiga, L.
- Affiliations
- Instituto de Engenharia de Sistemas e Computadores Investigação e Desenvolvimento (PT)
- Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (ES)
- Venue
- 2014 IEEE 6th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2014-12
- Pages
- 611-619
- OpenAlex
- W2039078487
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 2.56
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (publishedVersion)
- RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Funders
- Generalitat de Catalunya
- Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Energy Efficiency in Computing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Peer-to-Peer Network Technologies
- Keywords
- energy efficiency, decentralized cloud computing, data center energy consumption, cloud architecture, locality, MapReduce, distributed computing
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
