OGF19 -- NC 1 Service Level Agreements and QoS: what do we measure and why? Omer F. Rana School of Computer Science, Cardiff.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
You have been given a mission and a code. Use the code to complete the mission and you will save the world from obliteration…
Advertisements

Advanced Piloting Cruise Plot.
Pricing for Utility-driven Resource Management and Allocation in Clusters Chee Shin Yeo and Rajkumar Buyya Grid Computing and Distributed Systems (GRIDS)
Cognitive Radio Communications and Networks: Principles and Practice By A. M. Wyglinski, M. Nekovee, Y. T. Hou (Elsevier, December 2009) 1 Chapter 12 Cross-Layer.
1 Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved Fig 2.1 Chapter 2.
1 An Update on Multihoming in IPv6 Report on IETF Activity IPv6 Technical SIG 1 Sept 2004 APNIC18, Nadi, Fiji Geoff Huston.
Page 1 Approximately Maximum Bandwidth Routing for Slotted Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Approximately Maximum Bandwidth Routing for Slotted Wireless Ad Hoc.
11 Application of CSF4 in Avian Flu Grid: Meta-scheduler CSF4. Lab of Grid Computing and Network Security Jilin University, Changchun, China Hongliang.
Doc.: IEEE /0165r1 SubmissionPäivi Ruuska, NokiaSlide 1 Implementation aspects of a coexistence system Notice: This document has been.
Document #07-12G 1 RXQ Customer Enrollment Using a Registration Agent Process Flow Diagram (Switch) Customer Supplier Customer authorizes Enrollment.
Document #07-12G 1 RXQ Customer Enrollment Using a Registration Agent Process Flow Diagram (Switch) Customer Supplier Customer authorizes Enrollment.
On the Use of Service Level Agreements in AssessGrid.
4. May 2007 Workshop on Dynamic Service Level AgreementsPage 1 Dynamic SLA Negotiation in BREIN Bastian Koller High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart.
Towards Automating the Configuration of a Distributed Storage System Lauro B. Costa Matei Ripeanu {lauroc, NetSysLab University of British.
Business Transaction Management Software for Application Coordination 1 Business Processes and Coordination.
1 Multi-Channel Wireless Networks: Capacity and Protocols Nitin H. Vaidya University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Joint work with Pradeep Kyasanur Chandrakanth.
and 6.855J Cycle Canceling Algorithm. 2 A minimum cost flow problem , $4 20, $1 20, $2 25, $2 25, $5 20, $6 30, $
An Alliance based Peering Scheme for P2P Live Media Streaming Darshan Purandare Ratan Guha University of Central Florida August 31, P2P-TV, Kyoto.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Registry/Repository in a SOA Environment SOA Brown Bag #5 SWIM Team March 9, 2011.
Designing Services for Grid-based Knowledge Discovery A. Congiusta, A. Pugliese, Domenico Talia, P. Trunfio DEIS University of Calabria ITALY
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Title Subtitle.
DIVIDING INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
Addition Facts
Year 6 mental test 5 second questions
Making the System Operational
Evaluating Provider Reliability in Risk-aware Grid Brokering Iain Gourlay.
All rights reserved © 2005, Alcatel Grid services over IP Multimedia Subsystem  Antoine Pichot, Olivier Audouin, Alcatel  GridNets ’06.
Database Systems: Design, Implementation, and Management
Streaming Video over the Internet
Week 2 The Object-Oriented Approach to Requirements
BT Wholesale October Creating your own telephone network WHOLESALE CALLS LINE ASSOCIATED.
© Telcordia Technologies 2004 – All Rights Reserved AETG Web Service Tutorial AETG is a service mark of Telcordia Technologies. Telcordia Technologies.
AN INGENIOUS APPROACH FOR IMPROVING TURNAROUND TIME OF GRID JOBS WITH RESOURCE ASSURANCE AND ALLOCATION MECHANISM Shikha Mehrotra Centre for Development.
Real-Time Competitive Environments: Truthful Mechanisms for Allocating a Single Processor to Sporadic Tasks Anwar Mohammadi, Nathan Fisher, and Daniel.
Seungmi Choi PlanetLab - Overview, History, and Future Directions - Using PlanetLab for Network Research: Myths, Realities, and Best Practices.
1 Quality of Service Issues Network design and security Lecture 12.
Service Level Agreement
ABC Technology Project
COMP 482: Design and Analysis of Algorithms
Proposal by CA Technologies, IBM, SAP, Vnomic
IONA Technologies Position Paper Constraints and Capabilities for Web Services
Flow Aware Networking © 2007 Katedra Telekomunikacji AGH Flow Aware Networking Router model lead by prof. dr hab. inż. Andrzej Jajszczyk.
1 Adaptive Bandwidth Allocation in TDD-CDMA Systems Derek J Corbett & Prof. David Everitt The University of Sydney.
Requirements Analysis Moving to Design b521.ppt © Copyright De Montfort University 2000 All Rights Reserved INFO2005 Requirements Analysis.
Chapter 10 Software Testing
Processes Management.
GG Consulting, LLC I-SUITE. Source: TEA SHARS Frequently asked questions 2.
© 2004, D. J. Foreman 1 Scheduling & Dispatching.
Addition 1’s to 20.
25 seconds left…...
Week 1.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
Tarun Bansal*, Karthik Sundaresan+,
Chapter 13 The Data Warehouse
McGraw-Hill©The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2001 Chapter 16 Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN)
Delay Analysis and Optimality of Scheduling Policies for Multihop Wireless Networks Gagan Raj Gupta Post-Doctoral Research Associate with the Parallel.
Peter Key, Laurent Massoulie, Don Towsley Infocom 07 presented by Park HoSung 1 Path selection and multipath congestion control.
Dynamic SLAs Discussion Omer Rana, School of Computer Science, Cardiff.
1 GRAAP: Why do we need SLAs? Omer Rana
SPECIFYING AND MONITORING GUARANTEES IN COMMERCIAL GRIDS THROUGH SLA Sven Graupner Vijay MachirajuAad van Moorsel IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Clustering.
Quality of Service Karrie Karahalios Spring 2007.
Holding slide prior to starting show. G-QoSM: Grid-aware Quality of Service Management by Rashid Al-Ali, Omer Rana, and David Walker.
Cracow Grid Workshop ‘06 17 October 2006 Execution Management and SLA Enforcement in Akogrimo Antonios Litke Antonios Litke, Kleopatra Konstanteli, Vassiliki.
Enabling Grids for E-sciencE Agreement-based Workload and Resource Management Tiziana Ferrari, Elisabetta Ronchieri Mar 30-31, 2006.
Gestione di Service Level Agreements (SLA) in sistemi Grid
Resource and Service Management on the Grid
On the Use of Service Level Agreements in AssessGrid
Presentation transcript:

OGF19 -- NC 1 Service Level Agreements and QoS: what do we measure and why? Omer F. Rana School of Computer Science, Cardiff University, UK Welsh eScience Centre, UK

2 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) QoS Management QoS has been explored in: Computer Networks Bandwidth, Delay, Packet loss rate and Jitter. Multimedia Applications Frame rate and computation resource. Grid Computing Network QoS, computation and storage requirements.

3 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Continue … QoS management: Covers a range of different activities, from resource specification, selection and allocation through to resource release. QoS system should address the following: Specifying QoS requirements Mapping of QoS requirements to resource capability Negotiating QoS with resource owners Establishing contracts / SLAs with clients Reserving and allocating resources Monitoring parameters associated with QoS sessions Adapting to varying resource quality characteristics Terminating QoS sessions User Expectations vs. Resource Management

4 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) When QoS is needed? Interactive sessions Computation steering (control parameters & data exchange) Interactive visualization (visualization & simulations services) Response within a limited time span Co-scheduling or co-location support From SCIRun, University of Utah – Application QoS – User perception, response time, appl. Security, etc. – Middleware QoS – Comp., Memory and Storage – Network QoS – BW, Packet loss, Delay, Jitter

5 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) What is a Service Level Agreement (SLA)? Client Provider Can you do X for me for Y in return? Yes SLA Distinguish between: Discovery of suitable provider Establishment of an SLA P2P Search, Directory Service SLA-Offer SLA-Accept SLA-Reject A relationship between a client and provider in the context of a particular capability (service) provision

6 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) What is an SLA? Client Provider Can you do X for me for Y in return? No, but I can do Z for Y SLA Accept SLA-CounterOffer SLA-Offer SLA-Accept SLA-Reject

7 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) What is an SLA? Client Provider Can you do X for me for Y in return? No SLA Can you do Z for me for Y in return? Negotiation Phase (Single or Multi-Round) SLA-Offer SLA-CounterOffer SLA-OfferDependency

8 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Variations Client Providers SLA Client Providers SLA Multi-provider SLA Single SLA is divided across multiple providers (e.g. workflow composition) SLA dependencies For an SLA to be valid, another SLA has to be agreed (e.g. co-allocation)

9 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) QoS Context QoS: Per Service Per Workflow (Set of Services) Workflow: Aggregating metrics across services Support through some workflow enactor

10 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Dynamically established and managed relationship between two parties Objective is delivery of a service by one of the parties in the context of the agreement Delivery involves: Functional QoS Properties What is an SLA? SLA

11 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Forming the Agreement Distinguish between: Agreement itself Mechanisms that lead to the formation of the agreement Mechanisms that lead to agreement: Negotiation (single or multi-shot) One-shot creation Policy-based creation of agreements, etc.

12 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) WS-Agreement Name/ID Context Terms Composition Guarantee Terms Service Terms Agreement Information about Agreement Initiator Responder Expiration Time Information about Service Service Description Terms (generally, these are domain dependent) Information about Service Level Service Level Objectives, Qualifying Conditions for the agreement to be valid, Penalty Terms, etc

13 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) WS-Agreement Terms From: Viktor Yarmolenko (U Manchester)

14 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) SLA Life Cycle Identify Provider On completion of a discovery phase Define SLA Define what is being requested Agree on SLA terms Agree on Service Level Objectives Monitor SLA Violation Confirm whether SLOs are being violated Destroy SLA Expire SLA Penalty for SLA Violation

15 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) CATNETs: Metrics Pyramid

16 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) SLA Classes Guaranteed constraints to be exactly observed SLA is precisely/exactly defined adaptation algorithm/optimization heuristics Controlled-load some constraints may be observed Range-oriented SLA optimization heuristics Best-effort any resources will do no adaptation support

17 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Adaptation Algorithm Assume a total capacity: C= C G + C A + C B where G, A & B denotes guaranteed, adaptive and best effort Adapt(c(u,t), g(u)) Net capacity N G (t) = C G (t) – If N G (t) < 0; (guarantees cant be honoured) Then ADD ( - C G (t)) from A to G ADD (C A (t) – [ - C G (t)]) from A to B Before invoking the adaptive function: Ensuring that the request at time (t) g(u) --- (SLA) Ensuring that C G CG(t): Capacity in guaranteed block at time t; g(u): guarantee to user user u

18 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) SLA Adaptation Assume capacity Total : C= C G + C A + C B best effort can uses the adaptive capacity, as long as its not used by the guaranteed When QoS degrades for guaranteed Then adaptive is utilized to compensate for the degradation best effort can still utilize the remaining capacity of the adaptive, as long as its not used by the guaranteed When the congested capacity is restored, the adaptive capacity can be used entirely by the best effort GAB GBA GAB BAG GBA o Before invoking the adaptive function: o Ensuring that the request at time (t) the agreed upon in the SLA o Ensuring that the total capacities within all SLAs at time (t) C G Aim: compensation for QoS degradation for guaranteed class only

19 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) SLA Adaptation If we define a set: QoS = { a 1, a 2,..., a n }, where each a i represents a different parameter of interest such as CPU, network bandwidth, etc. Then we could compare sets: QoS x = { a 1x,..., a nx } and QoS y = {a 1y,..., a ny } QoS values specified in SLA as: a y a i a x Or a i ={ x, y, z } Assume the existence of a cost function: Cost(a i ) = c i * a i Then: Service_ Cost (QoS) = The proposed heuristic: Total Cost = max n is the total number of active services The QoS broker implements this heuristic by varying the resource quality selection, based on the agreed upon in the SLA, aiming to Optimize resource utilization and maximize the overall cost. This heuristic could be mapped to the Generalized Assignment Problem (GAP)

20 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Grid Node Reservation ManagerAllocation Manager Policy Manager QoS Grid Service Resources Grid QoS service interface

21 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Main components Policy Manager To provide dynamic info about the domain-specific resource characteristics and policy Reservation Manger To provide advance/immediate resource reservation Data structure contains reservation entries Interact with policy manager for resource char. Allocation Manger To interact with the underlying resource manager for resource allocation (e.g DSRT, Bandwidth Broker)

22 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) UDDIe QoS Broker Grid node 1 Grid node 2Grid node 3 QoS Discovery Client's Appl. QoS service ReservationAllocation Policy QoS service ReservationAllocation Policy QoS service ReservationAllocation Policy SLA Joint work with Argonne National Lab. (Gregor von Lazweski et al.)

23 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Reservation Approaches Resource reservation / allocation based on two strategies: Time-domain: reserve the whole compute power of Grid node. Guaranteed exclusive access Resource-domain: reserve a CPU slot of the Grid node. Shared access – guaranteed resource capacity Suitable for light weight applications/services.

24 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Best Effort

25 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF) Guaranteed

26 OGF19 – NC (QoS BoF)