Cited by 8Cloud Computing and Resource ManagementEnergy Efficiency in ComputingDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the cluster admission problem for cloud computing

Open access
Dierks, Ludwig, Kash, Ian, Seuken, Sven·2019·Proceedings of the 14th Workshop on the Economics of Networks, Systems and Computation

Abstract

Cloud computing providers face the problem of matching heterogeneous customer workloads to resources that will serve them. This is particularly challenging if customers, who are already running a job on a cluster, scale their resource usage up and down over time. The provider therefore has to continuously decide whether she can add additional workloads to a given cluster or if doing so would impact existing workloads’ ability to scale. Currently, this is often done using simple threshold policies to reserve large parts of each cluster, which leads to low efficiency (i.e., low average utilization of the cluster). We propose more sophisticated policies for controlling admission to a cluster and demonstrate that they significantly increase cluster utilization. We first introduce the cluster admission problem and formalize it as a constrained Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP). As it is infeasible to solve the POMDP optimally, we then systematically design admission policies that estimate moments of each workload’s distribution of future resource usage. Via extensive simulations grounded in a trace from Microsoft Azure, we show that our admission policies lead to a substantial improvement over the simple threshold policy. We then show that substantial further gains are possible if high-quality information is available about arriving workloads. Based on this, we propose an information elicitation approach to incentivize users to provide this information and simulate its effects.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3338506.3340274

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. 10.1109/INFCOMW.2012.6193479 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/2764468.2764535 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.robot.2006.05.007 · DOI
  4. 10.1145/3078505.3078530 · DOI
  5. 10.1145/3132747.3132772 · DOI
  6. 10.1145/3328526.3329590 · DOI
  7. Michael O'Gordon Duff and Andrew Barto. 2002. Optimal Learning: Computational procedures for Bayes-adaptive Markov decision processes. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Michael O'Gordon Duff and Andrew Barto. 2002. Optimal Learning: Computational procedures for Bayes-adaptive Markov decision processes. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
  8. Ghodsi Ali, 2011, USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation.
  9. Hindman Benjamin, 2011, Mesos: A Platform for Fine-Grained Resource Sharing in the Data Center, NSDI, 11, 22
  10. Sangeetha Abdu Jyothi Carlo Curino Ishai Menache Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy Alexey Tumanov Jonathan Yaniv Ruslan Mavlyutov Inigo Goiri Subru Krishnan Janardhan Kulkarni et al. 2016. Morpheus: Towards Automated SLOs for Enterprise Clusters.. In OSDI. 117--134. Sangeetha Abdu Jyothi Carlo Curino Ishai Menache Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy Alexey Tumanov Jonathan Yaniv Ruslan Mavlyutov Inigo Goiri Subru Krishnan Janardhan Kulkarni et al. 2016. Morpheus: Towards Automated SLOs for Enterprise Clusters.. In OSDI. 117--134.
  11. 10.1109/MIC.2016.4 · DOI
  12. 10.5555/2750423.2750439 · DOI
  13. Dongho Kim Jaesong Lee Kee-Eung Kim and Pascal Poupart. 2011. Point-based value iteration for constrained POMDPs. In IJCAI. 1968--1974. Dongho Kim Jaesong Lee Kee-Eung Kim and Pascal Poupart. 2011. Point-based value iteration for constrained POMDPs. In IJCAI. 1968--1974.
  14. 10.5555/1622394.1622398 · DOI
  15. 10.5555/2875343.2875347 · DOI
  16. 10.1145/2229012.2229075 · DOI
  17. Poupart Pascal, 2015, Approximate Linear Programming for Constrained Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes, AAAI, 1, 3342
  18. Stuart J Russell and Peter Norvig. 2016. Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Malaysia; Pearson Education Limited. Stuart J Russell and Peter Norvig. 2016. Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Malaysia; Pearson Education Limited.
  19. Santana Pedro, 2016, Proc. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
  20. 10.1145/2465351.2465386 · DOI
  21. 10.1287/opre.21.5.1071 · DOI
  22. Trey Smith and Reid Simmons. 2012. Point-based POMDP algorithms: Improved analysis and implementation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.1412 (2012). Trey Smith and Reid Simmons. 2012. Point-based POMDP algorithms: Improved analysis and implementation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.1412 (2012). · arXiv
  23. 10.1109/TC.2013.148 · DOI
  24. 10.1109/ROBOT.2010.5509743 · DOI
  25. 10.1145/2987550.2987576 · DOI
  26. 10.1109/TPDS.2015.2402655 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Keep-Alive Caching for the Hawkes process

    Narayana, S., & Kash, I. A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.03521

    “4 While small in absolute terms, percentage improvements of this scale translate to tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in cost savings for a major cloud provider Dierks et al. [2019]. Alternatively, this same improvement could be used to improve customer experience, reducing the number of cold starts by an averag…”
    BackgroundSelf-citation

See all 8

Metadata

Authors
Dierks, L., Kash, I., & Seuken, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 14th Workshop on the Economics of Networks, Systems and Computation
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-06-28
Volume
71
Pages
1-6
OpenAlex
W2952383157
Cited by
8
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.19
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Workshop on the Economics of Networks, Systems and Computation (NetEcon) (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Microsoft Research (2015-058)
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 › Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Keywords
cloud computing, resource allocation, cluster utilization, admission policy, partially observable Markov decision processes, threshold policy, information elicitation, heterogeneous workloads, Microsoft Azure

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