不要失去重点,检查一下:您的云应用程序是否使用了正确的策略

IF 0.5 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing Pub Date : 2019-08-09 DOI:10.1504/IJGUC.2019.10023121
D. Gomes, G. Gonçalves, P. Endo, Moisés Rodrigues, J. Kelner, D. Sadok, C. Curescu
{"title":"不要失去重点,检查一下:您的云应用程序是否使用了正确的策略","authors":"D. Gomes, G. Gonçalves, P. Endo, Moisés Rodrigues, J. Kelner, D. Sadok, C. Curescu","doi":"10.1504/IJGUC.2019.10023121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Users pay for running their applications on cloud infrastructure, and in return they expect high availability, and minimal data loss in case of failure. From a cloud provider perspective, any hardware or software failure must be detected and recovered as quickly as possible to maintain users' trust and avoid financial losses. From a user's perspective, failures must be transparent and should not impact application performance. In order to recover a failed application, cloud providers must perform checkpoints, and periodically save application data, which can then be recovered following a failover. Currently, a checkpoint service can be implemented in many ways, each presenting different performance results. The main research question to be answered is: what is the best checkpoint strategy to use given some users' requirements? In this paper, we performed experiments with different checkpoint service strategies to understand how these are affected by the computing resources. We also provide a discussion about the relationship between service availability and the checkpoint service.","PeriodicalId":44878,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Don't lose the point, check it: Is your cloud application using the right strategy\",\"authors\":\"D. Gomes, G. Gonçalves, P. Endo, Moisés Rodrigues, J. Kelner, D. Sadok, C. Curescu\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJGUC.2019.10023121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Users pay for running their applications on cloud infrastructure, and in return they expect high availability, and minimal data loss in case of failure. From a cloud provider perspective, any hardware or software failure must be detected and recovered as quickly as possible to maintain users' trust and avoid financial losses. From a user's perspective, failures must be transparent and should not impact application performance. In order to recover a failed application, cloud providers must perform checkpoints, and periodically save application data, which can then be recovered following a failover. Currently, a checkpoint service can be implemented in many ways, each presenting different performance results. The main research question to be answered is: what is the best checkpoint strategy to use given some users' requirements? In this paper, we performed experiments with different checkpoint service strategies to understand how these are affected by the computing resources. We also provide a discussion about the relationship between service availability and the checkpoint service.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44878,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGUC.2019.10023121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGUC.2019.10023121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

用户为在云基础设施上运行他们的应用程序付费,作为回报,他们期望高可用性,并且在发生故障时最小化数据丢失。从云提供商的角度来看,任何硬件或软件故障都必须尽快检测和恢复,以保持用户的信任并避免经济损失。从用户的角度来看,故障必须是透明的,并且不应该影响应用程序的性能。为了恢复失败的应用程序,云提供商必须执行检查点,并定期保存应用程序数据,然后可以在故障转移后恢复这些数据。目前,检查点服务可以通过多种方式实现,每种方式都有不同的性能结果。要回答的主要研究问题是:考虑到某些用户的需求,最好的检查点策略是什么?在本文中,我们对不同的检查点服务策略进行了实验,以了解这些策略如何受到计算资源的影响。我们还讨论了服务可用性和检查点服务之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Don't lose the point, check it: Is your cloud application using the right strategy
Users pay for running their applications on cloud infrastructure, and in return they expect high availability, and minimal data loss in case of failure. From a cloud provider perspective, any hardware or software failure must be detected and recovered as quickly as possible to maintain users' trust and avoid financial losses. From a user's perspective, failures must be transparent and should not impact application performance. In order to recover a failed application, cloud providers must perform checkpoints, and periodically save application data, which can then be recovered following a failover. Currently, a checkpoint service can be implemented in many ways, each presenting different performance results. The main research question to be answered is: what is the best checkpoint strategy to use given some users' requirements? In this paper, we performed experiments with different checkpoint service strategies to understand how these are affected by the computing resources. We also provide a discussion about the relationship between service availability and the checkpoint service.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing
International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
79
期刊最新文献
Performance comparison of various machine learning classifiers using a fusion of LBP, intensity and GLCM feature extraction techniques for thyroid nodules classification SMGSAF: a secure multi-geocasting scheme for npportunistic Networks Cloud computing data privacy protection method based on blockchain Layered management approach to cyber security of IoT solutions Research on the extraction of accounting multi-relationship information based on cloud computing and multimedia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1