Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

A Switch in Time Saves the Dime: : A Model to Reduce Rental Cost in Cloud Computing

Published: 01 September 2020 Publication History

Abstract

With the rapid growth of cloud computing, firms face a dizzying array of choices and pricing structures for performing their computing tasks on the cloud. Unlike captive computing resources, cloud computing occurs as a pay-as-you-go contract, similar to the provision of electricity. We develop a method to reduce the rental cost of completing a given computing task with a certain deadline. The current practice is to use a single computing resource that can get the task done in the cheapest possible manner. Instead, costs can be significantly reduced if the task is switched between multiple resources, some more powerful and others less powerful. We apply our method to a real computing task at Cidewalk and show that costs can be significantly reduced.

Abstract

The goal to continually reduce operating costs while meeting computational needs is common to all modern organizations that use cloud computing. We study the problem of selecting computing resources with the goal of minimizing the total rental cost of completing a computing task in the presence of a time constraint. The problem is formulated as a scheduling problem that assigns computing resources to time periods of the planning horizon (time available to complete a single computing task). This (NP-hard) preemptive-resume type scheduling problem—new to the scheduling literature—has not been carefully addressed in practice to provide an implementable solution. Typically, the approach taken in practice is to use a single resource (a single virtual machine instance, or a cluster of identical virtual machine instances) to complete a computing task. The main insight of this study is that rather than completing a computing task using a single computing resource, rental costs can be significantly lowered by using a few resources (sometimes even just two) to complete the task. Thus, the computing task is switched from one resource to another to exploit the cloud provider’s price-performance schedule. Cloud computing has been recognized as an economically attractive computing environment whose adoption has been growing over time. However, providers (such as Amazon Web Services) offer a confusing and diverse set of computing resources with different configurations and unit rental costs. Our near-optimal solution is based on switching the computing task from one resource to another in way that leverages the relationship between the price and performance of the available computing resources. The performance of a given resource can vary randomly as well as be correlated with the performance of another (stronger or weaker) resource. We present a worst-case performance guarantee of the proposed solution. In addition, we study the performance using a detailed computational study and a real-world example of an actual company that can benefit from our proposed solution. In the computational study as well as the real-world example, the cost of our solution is usually about 15%–25% lower than the benchmark solution of using the best single computing resource to process the computing task. Practicing information technology managers can use our approach to migrate in-house solutions to the cloud in a cost-effective manner.

References

[1]
Anwar N, Deng H (2018) Elastic scheduling of scientific workflows under deadline constraints in cloud computing environments. Future Internet 10(1):5–28.
[2]
Artigues C, Koné O, Lopez P, Mongeau M (2015) Mixed-integer linear programming formulations. Schwindt C, Zimmermann J, eds. Handbook on Project Management and Scheduling, vol. 1 (Springer, New York), 17–41.
[3]
Awad A, El-Hefnawy N, Abdel_kader H (2015) Enhanced particle swarm optimization for task scheduling in cloud computing environments. Procedia Comput. Sci. 65:920–929.
[4]
Aymerich FM, Fenu G, Surcis S (2009) A real time financial system based on grid and cloud computing. Proc. 2009 ACM Symp. Appl. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1219–1220.
[5]
Barak A, La’adan O (1998) The MOSIX multicomputer operating system for high performance cluster computing. Future Generation Comput. Systems 13(4–5):361–372.
[6]
Berry AC (1941) The accuracy of the Gaussian approximation to the sum of independent variates. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 49(1):122–136.
[7]
Billingsley P (2008) Probability and Measure (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).
[8]
Blazewicz J, Ecker KH, Pesch E, Schmidt G, Weglarz J (2013) Scheduling Computer and Manufacturing Processes (Springer Science & Business Media, New York).
[9]
Braun TD, Siegel HJ, Beck N, Bölöni LL, Maheswaran M, Reuther AI, Robertson JP, et al. (2001) A comparison of eleven static heuristics for mapping a class of independent tasks onto heterogeneous distributed computing systems. J. Parallel Distributed Comput. 61(6):810–837.
[10]
Bubeck S, Cesa-Bianchi N (2012) Regret analysis of stochastic and nonstochastic multi-armed bandit problems. Foundations Trends Machine Learn. 5(1):1–122.
[11]
Buyya R, Beloglazov A, Abawajy J (2010) Energy-efficient management of data center resources for cloud computing: A vision, architectural elements, and open challenges. Working paper, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
[12]
Chakaravarthy VT, Choudhury AR, Natarajan SR, Roy S (2013) Knapsack cover subject to a matroid constraint. Seth A, Vishnoi NK, eds. 2013 Leibniz Internat. Proc. Informatics (Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany), 275–286.
[13]
Chen H, Zhu X, Guo H, Zhu J, Qin X, Wu J (2015) Toward energy-efficient scheduling for real-time tasks under uncertain cloud computing environment. J. Systems Software 99:20–35.
[14]
Cheng HK, Li Z, Naranjo A (2016) Research note—Cloud computing spot pricing dynamics: Latency and limits to arbitrage. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):145–165.
[15]
Cidewalk (2017) Private e-mail and in-person communication.
[17]
CPLEX (2011) IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio: CPLEX User’s Manual, version 12, release 4 (IBM, Armonk, New York).
[18]
Davis RI, Burns A (2011) A survey of hard real-time scheduling for multiprocessor systems. ACM Comput. Surveys 43(4):1–44.
[19]
Dongarra JJ (1993) Performance of various computers using standard linear equations software. Report, Computer Science Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
[20]
Dziok T, Figiela K, Malawski M (2016) Adaptive multi-level workflow scheduling with uncertain task estimates. Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics (Springer, New York), 90–100.
[21]
Ekanayake J, Fox G (2009) High performance parallel computing with clouds and cloud technologies. Internat. Conf. Cloud Comput. (Springer, New York), 20–38.
[22]
Esseen CG (1942) On the Liapounoff Limit of Error in the Theory of Probability (Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm).
[23]
Esseen CG (1956) A moment inequality with an application to the central limit theorem. Scandanavian Actuarial J. 1956(2):160–170.
[24]
Gantz JF, Miller P (2016) The Salesforce economy: Enabling 1.9 million new jobs and $389 billion in new revenue over the next five years. White paper, International Data Corporation, New York.
[25]
Garey MR, Johnson DS (1979) Computers and Intractability. A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness (W. H. Freeman and Company, New York).
[26]
Gartner (2017) Gartner says worldwide public cloud services market to grow 18 percent in 2017. Gartner, Inc. (February 22), http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3616417.
[27]
Gonzalez T, Sahni S (1976) Open shop scheduling to minimize finish time. J. ACM 23(4):665–679.
[28]
Graham RL, Lawler EL, Lenstra JK, Kan AR (1979) Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: A survey. Ann. Discrete Math. 5:287–326.
[29]
Harris D (2015) The economics of cloud computing are, in a word, confusing. Forbes (June 10), http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2015/06/10/the-economics-of-cloud-computing-are-in-a-word-confusing/#85c8222106ca.
[30]
Hogg RV, Tanis EA (2009) Probability and Statistical Inference (Pearson Educational International, London).
[31]
Hsieh CC (2003) Optimal task allocation and hardware redundancy policies in distributed computing systems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 147(2):430–447.
[32]
Juve G, Deelman E, Berriman GB, Berman BP, Maechling P (2012) An evaluation of the cost and performance of scientific workflows on Amazon EC2. J. Grid Comput. 10(1):5–21.
[33]
Kartik S, Murthy CSR (1995) Improved task-allocation algorithms to maximize reliability of redundant distributed computing systems. IEEE Trans. Reliability 44(4):575–586.
[34]
Kokilavani T, Amalarethinam DG (2011) Load balanced min-min algorithm for static meta-task scheduling in grid computing. Internat. J. Comput. Appl. 20(2):43–49.
[35]
Kumar K, Feng J, Nimmagadda Y, Lu YH (2011) Resource allocation for real-time tasks using cloud computing. Proc. 20th Internat. Conf. Comput Comm. Networks (ICCCN) (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 1–7.
[36]
Kumar S, Dutta K, Mookerjee V (2009) Maximizing business value by optimal assignment of jobs to resources in grid computing. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 194(3):856–872.
[37]
Lawler EL, Labetoulle J (1978) On preemptive scheduling of unrelated parallel processors by linear programming. J. ACM 25(4):612–619.
[38]
Lenstra JK, Kan AR, Brucker P (1977) Complexity of machine scheduling problems. Ann. Discrete Math. 1:343–362.
[39]
Li X, Wu J, Tang S, Lu S (2014) Let’s stay together: Toward traffic aware virtual machine placement in data centers. Proc. IEEE INFOCOM (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 1842–1850.
[40]
Liu D, Sarkar S, Sriskandarajah C (2010) Resource allocation policies for personalization in content delivery sites. Inform. Systems Res. 21(2):227–248.
[41]
Liu L, Mei H, Xie B (2016) Toward a multi-QoS human-centric cloud computing load balance resource allocation method. J. Supercomput. 72(7):2488–2501.
[42]
Madni SHH, Latiff MSA, Coulibaly Y, Abdulhamid SM (2017) Recent advancements in resource allocation techniques for cloud computing environment: A systematic review. Cluster Comput. 20(3):2489–2533.
[43]
Mahmood A (2000) A hybrid genetic algorithm for task scheduling in multiprocessor real-time systems. Stud. Inform. Control 9(3):207–218.
[44]
Mahmood A, Khan SA (2017) Hard real-time task scheduling in cloud computing using an adaptive genetic algorithm. Computers 6(2):15–36.
[45]
Mao M, Humphrey M (2011) Auto-scaling to minimize cost and meet application deadlines in cloud workflows. Proc. Internat. Conf. High Performance Comput. Networking Storage Anal. (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), Article 49.
[46]
Markets and Markets (2018) Cloud services brokerage market worth 15.03 billion USD by 2023. Markets and Markets (May), https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/cloud-brokerage.asp.
[47]
McKendrick J (2016) Cloud computing becomes a home for data analytics. Forbes (February 6), https://www.forbes.com/sites/joemckendrick/2016/02/06/cloud-computing-becomes-a-home-for-data-analytics/#6bdcd7824eaa.
[48]
MSV J (2018) 10 key takeaways from RightScale state of the cloud report. Forbes (February 18), https://www.forbes.com/sites/janakirammsv/2018/02/18/10-key-takeaways-from-rightscale-state-of-the-cloud-report/#7d19ce041283.
[49]
Navimipour NJ, Khanli LM (2008) The LGR method for task scheduling in computational grid. Proc. Internat. Conf. Advanced Comput. Theory Engrg. (ICACTE) (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 1062–1066.
[50]
Ostermann S, Iosup A, Yigitbasi N, Prodan R, Fahringer T, Epema D (2009) A performance analysis of EC2 cloud computing services for scientific computing. Proc. Internat. Conf. Cloud Comput. (Springer), 115–131.
[51]
Oxford Economics and SAP (2015) The cloud grows up. Oxford Economics (March 2), http://www.oxfordeconomics.com/my-oxford/projects/291744.
[52]
Panda SK, Gupta I, Jana PK (2015) Allocation-aware task scheduling for heterogeneous multi-cloud systems. Procedia Comput. Sci. 50:176–184.
[53]
Peng Y, Kang DK, Al-Hazemi F, Youn CH (2017) Energy and QoS aware resource allocation for heterogeneous sustainable cloud datacenters. Optical Switching Networking 23:225–240.
[54]
Pinedo ML (2016) Scheduling: Theory, Algorithms, and Systems (Springer, New York).
[55]
Qamhieh M, Fauberteau F, George L, Midonnet S (2013) Global EDF scheduling of directed acyclic graphs on multiprocessor systems. Proc. 21st Internat. Conf. Real-Time Networks Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 287–296.
[56]
Quora (2016) How can I choose the right EC2 instance type? Accessed March 2, 2020, https://www.quora.com/How-can-I-choose-the-right-EC2-instance-type.
[57]
Reddy S, Sarkar A (2015) Amazon EC2 Cookbook (Packt Publishing Ltd, Birmingham, UK).
[58]
Sahni S (1975) Approximate algorithms for the 0/1 knapsack problem. J. ACM 22(1):115–124.
[59]
Sangwan A, Kumar G, Gupta S (2016) To convalesce task scheduling in a decentralized cloud computing environment. Rev. Comput. Engrg. Res. 3(1):25–34.
[60]
Sen S, Raghu T, Vinze A (2010) Demand information sharing in heterogeneous IT services environments. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(4):287–316.
[61]
Shojafar M, Pooranian Z, Abawajy JH, Meybodi MR (2013) An efficient scheduling method for grid systems based on a hierarchical stochastic Petri net. J. Comput. Sci. Engrg. 7(1):44–52.
[62]
Stavrinides GL, Karatza HD (2011) Scheduling multiple task graphs in heterogeneous distributed real-time systems by exploiting schedule holes with bin packing techniques. Simulation Model. Practice Theory. 19(1):540–552.
[63]
Synergy Research Group (2016) Amazon dominates public IAAS and ahead in PAAS; IBM leads in private cloud. Synergy Research Group (October 30), https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-dominates-public-iaas-paas-ibm-leads-managed-private-cloud.
[64]
Tsai CW, Huang WC, Chiang MH, Chiang MC, Yang CS (2014) A hyper-heuristic scheduling algorithm for cloud. IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput. 2(2):236–250.
[65]
Tsai WT, Shao Q, Sun X, Elston J (2010) Real-time service-oriented cloud computing. Proc. 6th World Congress Services (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 473–478.
[66]
Wang H, Wang F, Liu J, Wang D, Groen J (2015) Enabling customer-provided resources for cloud computing: potentials, challenges, and implementation. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Systems 26(7):1874–1886.
[67]
Weins K (2018) Cloud computing trends: 2018 state of the cloud survey. Flexera (blog) (February 13), https://www.rightscale.com/blog/cloud-industry-insights/cloud-computing-trends-2018-state-cloud-survey#significant-wasted-cloud-spend.
[68]
Wu D, Ding M, Hitt LM (2012) II implementation contract design: Analytical and experimental investigation of IT value, learning, and contract structure. Inform. Systems Res. 24(3):787–801.
[69]
Wu X, Deng M, Zhang R, Zeng B, Zhou S (2013) A task scheduling algorithm based on QoS-driven in cloud computing. Procedia Comput. Sci. 17:1162–1169.
[70]
Yi P, Ding H, Ramamurthy B (2013) Budget-minimized resource allocation and task scheduling in distributed grid/clouds. Proc. 22nd Internat. Conf. Comput. Comm. Networks (ICCCN) (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 1–8.
[71]
Younge AJ, Von Laszewski G, Wang L, Lopez-Alarcon S, Carithers W (2010) Efficient resource management for cloud computing environments. Proc. Internat. Green Comput. Conf. (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 357–364.
[72]
Yuan S, Das S, Ramesh R, Qiao C (2018) Service agreement trifecta: Backup resources, price and penalty in the availability-aware cloud. Inform. Systems Res. 29(4):779–1068.
[73]
Zhang YF, Tian YC, Fidge C, Kelly W (2016) Data-aware task scheduling for all-to-all comparison problems in heterogeneous distributed systems. J. Parallel Distributed Comput. 93–94:87–101.
[74]
Zhang Z, Wang H, Xiao L, Ruan L (2011) A statistical based resource allocation scheme in cloud. Proc. Internat. Conf. Cloud Service Comput. (CSC) (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 266–273.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Information Systems Research
Information Systems Research  Volume 31, Issue 3
September 2020
391 pages
ISSN:1526-5536
DOI:10.1287/isre.2020.31.issue-3
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

INFORMS

Linthicum, MD, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 September 2020
Accepted: 07 May 2019
Received: 18 January 2018

Author Tags

  1. cloud computing
  2. total rental cost minimization
  3. near-optimal solution

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 11 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Technical Note—Cloud Cost OptimizationOperations Research10.1287/opre.2022.036272:1(132-150)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
  • (2023)Understanding the Developments in the Business Perspective of Cloud ComputingJournal of Organizational and End User Computing10.4018/JOEUC.33075135:1(1-36)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
  • (2022)Spot instance similarity and substitution effect in cloud spot marketDecision Support Systems10.1016/j.dss.2022.113815159:COnline publication date: 1-Aug-2022
  • (2021)Does Congestion Always Hurt? Managing Discount Under Congestion in a Game-Theoretic SettingInformation Systems Research10.1287/isre.2021.104032:4(1347-1367)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2021

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media