skip to main content
10.1145/1064979.1064983acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesveeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Friendly virtual machines: leveraging a feedback-control model for application adaptation

Published:11 June 2005Publication History

ABSTRACT

With the increased use of "Virtual Machines" (VMs) as vehicles that isolate applications running on the same host, it is necessary to devise techniques that enable multiple VMs to share underlying resources both fairly and efficiently. To that end, one common approach is to deploy complex resource management techniques in the hosting infrastructure. Alternately, in this paper, we advocate the use of self-adaptation in the VMs themselves based on feedback about resource usage and availability. Consequently, we define "Friendly" VM (FVM) to be a virtual machine that adjusts its demand for system resources, so that they are both efficiently and fairly allocated to competing FVMs. Such properties are ensured using one of many provably convergent control rules, such as Additive-Increase/Multiplicative-Decrease (AIMD). By adopting this distributed application-based approach to resource management, it is not necessary to make assumptions about the underlying resources nor about the requirements of FVMs competing for these resources. To demonstrate the elegance and simplicity of our approach, we present a prototype implementation of our FVM framework in User-Mode Linux (UML)---an implementation that consists of less than 500 lines of code changes to UML. We present an analytic, control-theoretic model of FVM adaptation, which establishes convergence and fairness properties. These properties are also backed up with experimental results using our prototype FVM implementation.

References

  1. T. Abdelzaher and C. Lu. Modeling and performance control of internet servers. In Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (ICDC), Sydney, Australia, December 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. M. Accetta, R. Baron, W. Bolosky, D. Golub, R. Rashid, A. Tevanian, and M. Young. Mach: A new kernel foundation for UNIX development. In Summer USENIX Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, July 1986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Andersson, M. Kihl, and A. Robertsson. Modelling and design of admission control mechanisms for web servers using non-linear control theory. In Proceedings of ITCom, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. D. Bansal and H. Balakrishnan. Binomial congestion control algorithms. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, R. Neugebauer, I. Pratt, and A. Warfield. Xen and the art of virtualization. In Proceedings of SOSP, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. Bertsekas and R. Gallager. Data Networks.Prentice-Hall, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Bovet, M. Cesati, and A. Oram. Understanding the Linux Kernel, 2nd Ed. O'Reilly & Associates, Inc., 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. T. Bu and D. Towsley. Fixed point approximations for tcp behavior in an aqm network. In ACM SIGMETRICS, Boston, MA, June 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. E. Bugnion, S. Devine, K. Govil, and M. Rosenblum. Disco: Running commodity operatingsystems on scalable multiprocessors. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, volume 15(number 4):pp 412--447, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. Carlstrom and R. Rom. Application-aware admission control and scheduling in web servers. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. H. Chen and P. Mohapatra. Session-based overload control in qos-aware web servers. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D. D. Clark. The design philosophy of the DARPA internet protocols. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. A. Demers, S. Keshav, and S. Shenker. Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM, Austin, TX, September 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. D. Dhurjati, S. Kowshik, V. Adve, and C. Lattner. Memory safety without runtime checks or garbage collection. In Proc. Languages Compilers and Tools for Embedded Systems 2003, San Diego, CA, June 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Y. Diao, N. Gandhi, S. Parekh, J. Hellerstein, and D. Tilbury. Using mimo feedback control to enforce policies for interrelated metrics with application to the apache web server. In Proceedings of the Network Operations and Management Symposium 2002, Florence, Italy, April 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. D. R. Engler, F. Kaashoek, and J. O'Toole. Exokernel: An operating system architecture for application-level resource management. In Proceedings of SOSP, pages 251--266, Copper Mountain Resort, Colorado, USA, December 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. R. Gibbens and F. Kelly. Resource pricing and the evolution of congestion control. Automatica, 35:1969--1985, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. M. Hand. Self-paging in the nemesis operating system. In Proceedings of OSDI, pages 73--86. USENIX Association, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. Hollot, V. Misra, D. Towsley, and W. Gong. A control theoretic analysis of red. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, April 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. T. Jim, G. Morrisett, D. Grossman, M. Hicks, J. Cheney, and Y. Wang. Cyclone: A safe dialect of c. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. S. Jin, L. Guo, I. Matta, and A. Bestavros. A spectrum of tcp-friendly window-based congestion control algorithms. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 11(3), June 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. F. Kelly, A. Maulloo, and D. Tan. Rate control for communication networks: Shadow prices, proporti onal fairness and stability. Journal of Operations Research Society, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. S. King, G. W. Dunlap, and P. M. Chen. Operating system support for virtual machines. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. J. Liedtke. On μ-kernel construction. In Proceedings of SOSP, December 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. Lim, C. Lee, C. Ahn, C. Lee, and K. Park. An adaptive admission control mechanism for a cluster-based web server system. In Proceedings of IPDPS'02, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, April 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. Low and D. Lapsley. Optimization flow control, I:basic algorithm and convergence. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. D. Mosberger and T. Jin. httperf- a tool for measuring web server performance. In Proceedings of the First workshop on Internet Server Performance, Madison, WI, June 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. K. Ogata. Modern control engineering,. Prentice Hall, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. G. Popek and R. Goldberg. Formal requirements for virtualizable third generation architectures. Communications of the ACM, 17(7):pp 413--421, July 1974. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. A. Robertsson, B. Wittenmark, and M. Kihl. Analysis and design of admission control systems in web-server systems. In Proceedings of American Control Conference (ACC), June 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. J. S. Robin and C. Irvine K. Analysis of the intel pentium's ability to support a secure virtual machine monitor. In USENIX Security Symposium, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. J. Saltzer, D. Reed, and D. Clark. End-to-end arguments in system design. In ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS), pages Vol.2, No.4 195--206, 1984. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. P. J. Shenoy and H. Vin. Cello: A disk scheduling framework for next generation operating systems. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, Madison, Wisconsin, June 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. J. Sugerman, G. Venkitachalam, and B. H. Lim. Virtualizing i/o devices on vmware workstation's hosted virtual machine monitor. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pages 1--14, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. The user-mode linux kernel home page: http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Vmware: http://www.vmware.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. C. Waldspurger and W. Weihl. Stride scheduling: Deterministic proportional share resource management. In Technical Memorandum MIT/LCS/TM-528, June 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. M. Welsh and D. Culler. Adaptive overload control for busy internet servers. In Proceedings of the 4th USENIX Conference on Internet Technologies and Systems, March 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. A. Whitaker, M. Shaw, and S. D. Gribble. Scale and performance in the denali isolation kernel. In Proceedings of OSDI, Boston, MA, USA, December 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Friendly virtual machines: leveraging a feedback-control model for application adaptation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      VEE '05: Proceedings of the 1st ACM/USENIX international conference on Virtual execution environments
      June 2005
      216 pages
      ISBN:1595930477
      DOI:10.1145/1064979

      Copyright © 2005 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 June 2005

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate80of235submissions,34%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!