skip to main content
tutorial

MigVisor: Accurate Prediction of VM Live Migration Behavior using a Working-Set Pattern Model

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 April 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Live migration of a virtual machine (VM) is a powerful technique with benefits of server maintenance, resource management, dynamic workload re-balance, etc. Modern research has effectively reduced the VM live migration (VMLM) time to dozens of milliseconds, but live migration still exhibits failures if it cannot terminate within the given time constraint. The ability to predict this type of failure can avoid wasting networking and computing resources on the VM migration, and the associated system performance degradation caused by wasting these resources. The cost of VM live migration highly depends on the application workload of the VM, which may undergo frequent changes. At the same time, the available system resources for VM migration can also change substantially and frequently. To account for these issues, we present a solution called MigVisor, which can accurately predict the behaviour of VM migration using working-set model. This can enable system managers to predict the migration cost and enhance the system management efficacy. The experimental results prove the design suitability and show that the MigVisor has a high prediction accuracy since the average relative error between the predicted value and the measured value is only 6.2%~9%.

References

  1. http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/programs/ab.html/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. https://github.com/akopytov/sysbench/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. http://www.spec.org/jbb2005/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. R. W. Ahmad, A. Gani, S. H. Ab. Hamid, M. Shiraz, F. Xia, and S. A. Madani. Virtual machine migration in cloud data centers: a review, taxonomy, and open research issues. The Journal of Supercomputing, 71(7):2473--2515, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. R. W. Ahmad, A. Gani, S. H. A. Hamid, M. Shiraz, A. Yousafzai, and F. Xia. A survey on virtual machine migration and server consolidation frameworks for cloud data centers. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 52: 11--25, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S. Akoush, R. Sohan, A. Rice, A. W. Moore, and A. Hopper. Predicting the performance of virtual machine migration. In 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, pages 37--46. IEEE, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Beloglazov and R. Buyya. Openstack neat: a framework for dynamic and energy-efficient consolidation of virtual machines in openstack clouds. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 27(5):1310--1333, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. K. Bose and S. Sundarrajan. Optimizing migration of virtual machines across data-centers. In Parallel Processing Workshops, 2009. ICPPW'09. International Conference on, pages 306--313. IEEE, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. R. Boutaba, Q. Zhang, and M. F. Zhani. Virtual machine migration in cloud computing environments: benefits, challenges, and approaches. Communication Infrastructures for Cloud Computing. H. Mouftah and B. Kantarci (Eds.). IGI-Global, USA, pages 383--408, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. A. Brown, L. Porter, and D. M. Tullsen. Fast thread migration via cache working set prediction. In High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2011 IEEE 17th International Symposium on, pages 193--204. IEEE, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. E. Casalicchio, D. A. Menascé, and A. Aldhalaan. Autonomic resource provisioning in cloud systems with availability goals. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Cloud and Autonomic Computing Conference, page 1. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. C. Clark, K. Fraser, S. Hand, J. G. Hansen, E. Jul, C. Limpach, I. Pratt, and A. Warfield. Live migration of virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 2nd conference on Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation-Volume 2, pages 273--286. USENIX Association, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. P. J. Denning. The working set model for program behavior. Communications of the ACM, 11(5):323--333, 1968. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. P. J. Denning. On modeling program behavior. In Proceedings of the May 16-18, 1972, spring joint computer conference, pages 937--944. ACM, 1972.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. P. J. Denning. Working sets past and present. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, (1):64--84, 1980.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. U. Deshpande, X. Wang, and K. Gopalan. Live gang migration of virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 20th international symposium on High performance distributed computing, pages 135--146. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. A. S. Dhodapkar and J. E. Smith. Managing multiconfiguration hardware via dynamic working set analysis. In Computer Architecture, 2002. Proceedings. 29th Annual International Symposium on, pages 233--244. IEEE, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Y. Ding, X. Qin, L. Liu, and T. Wang. Energy efficient scheduling of virtual machines in cloud with deadline constraint. Future Generation Computer Systems, 50:62--74, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. Forsman, A. Glad, L. Lundberg, and D. Ilie. Algorithms for automated live migration of virtual machines. Journal of Systems and Software, 101:110--126, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. M. R. Hines, U. Deshpande, and K. Gopalan. Post-copy live migration of virtual machines. ACM SIGOPS operating systems review, 43(3):14--26, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. B. Hu, Z. Lei, Y. Lei, D. Xu, and J. Li. A time-series based precopy approach for live migration of virtual machines. In Parallel and Distributed Systems (ICPADS), 2011 IEEE 17th International Conference on, pages 947--952. IEEE, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. K. Z. Ibrahim, S. Hofmeyr, C. Iancu, and E. Roman. Optimized pre-copy live migration for memory intensive applications. In Proceedings of 2011 International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, page 40. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. H. Jin, L. Deng, S. Wu, X. Shi, and X. Pan. Live virtual machine migration with adaptive, memory compression. In Cluster Computing and Workshops, 2009. CLUSTER'09. IEEE International Conference on, pages 1--10. IEEE, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. H. Jin, W. Gao, S. Wu, X. Shi, X. Wu, and F. Zhou. Optimizing the live migration of virtual machine by cpu scheduling. Journal of Network & Computer Applications, 34(4):1088--1096, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. T. Jones, A. C. Arpaci-Dusseau, and R. H. Arpaci-Dusseau. Geiger: monitoring the buffer cache in a virtual machine environment. In ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, volume 40, pages 14--24. ACM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. N. J. Kansal and I. Chana. Cloud load balancing techniques: a step towards green computing. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 9(1):238--246, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. A. Kivity, Y. Kamay, D. Laor, U. Lublin, and A. Liguori. kvm: the linux virtual machine monitor. In Proceedings of the Linux symposium, volume 1, pages 225--230, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. T. Kukrál, M. Kozák, T. Hégr, and L. Boháč. Vm migration measurement and failure detection. In Telecommunications and Signal Processing (TSP), 2015 38th International Conference on, pages 285--288. IEEE, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. N. Kumar and S. Saxena. Migration performance of cloud applications-a quantitative analysis. Procedia Computer Science, 45:823--831, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. H. Liu, H. Jin, C.-Z. Xu, and X. Liao. Performance and energy modeling for live migration of virtual machines. Cluster Computing, 16(2):249--264, 2013. ISSN 1573-7543. doi: 10.1007/s10586-011-0194-3. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10586-011-0194-3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. X. Liu, W. Tong, X. Zhi, F. Zhiren, and L. Wenzhao. Performance analysis of cloud computing services considering resources sharing among virtual machines. The Journal of Supercomputing, 69(1):357--374, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. P. Lu, A. Barbalace, R. Palmieri, and B. Ravindran. Adaptive live migration to improve load balancing in virtual machine environment. In Euro-Par Workshops, pages 116--125, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. F. Ma, F. Liu, and Z. Liu. Live virtual machine migration based on improved pre-copy approach. In Software Engineering and Service Sciences (ICSESS), 2010 IEEE International Conference on, pages 230--233. IEEE, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. A. Mashtizadeh, E. Celebi, T. Garfinkel, M. Cai, et al. The design and evolution of live storage migration in vmware esx. In USENIX ATC, volume 11, pages 1--14, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. A. J. Mashtizadeh, M. Cai, G. Tarasuk-Levin, R. Koller, T. Garfinkel, and S. Setty. Xvmotion: unified virtual machine migration over long distance. In Usenix Conference on Usenix Technical Conference, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. M. Nelson, B.-H. Lim, and G. Hutchins. Fast transparent migration for virtual machines. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on USENIX Annual Technical Conference, ATEC '05, pages 25--25, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2005. USENIX Association.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. A. Shribman and B. Hudzia. Pre-copy and post-copy vm live migration for memory intensive applications. In Euro-Par 2012: Parallel Processing Workshops, pages 539--547. Springer, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. P. Svärd, B. Hudzia, J. Tordsson, and E. Elmroth. Evaluation of delta compression techniques for efficient live migration of large virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments, VEE '11, pages 111--120, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-0687-4. doi: 10.1145/1952682.1952698. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. M. Tarighi, S. A. Motamedi, and S. Sharifian. A new model for virtual machine migration in virtualized cluster server based on fuzzy decision making. arXiv preprint arXiv:1002.3329, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. M. M. Theimer, K. A. Lantz, and D. R. Cheriton. Preemptable remote execution facilities for the V-system, volume 19. ACM, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. T. Wood, P. J. Shenoy, A. Venkataramani, and M. S. Yousif. Black-box and gray-box strategies for virtual machine migration. In NSDI, volume 7, pages 17--17, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Z. Xu and W. Liang. Operational cost minimization of distributed data centers through the provision of fair request rate allocations while meeting different user slas. Computer Networks, 83:59--75, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. F. Yin, W. Liu, and J. Song. Live virtual machine migration with optimized three-stage memory copy. In Future Information Technology, pages 69--75. Springer, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Z. Zhang, L. Xiao, M. Zhu, and L. Ruan. Mvmotion: a metadata based virtual machine migration in cloud. Cluster Computing, 17(2):441--452, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

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

Full Access

  • Published in

    cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices
    ACM SIGPLAN Notices  Volume 52, Issue 7
    VEE '17
    July 2017
    256 pages
    ISSN:0362-1340
    EISSN:1558-1160
    DOI:10.1145/3140607
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    • cover image ACM Conferences
      VEE '17: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments
      April 2017
      261 pages
      ISBN:9781450349482
      DOI:10.1145/3050748

    Copyright © 2017 ACM

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 8 April 2017

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • tutorial
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

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!