Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Continuous memory allocation model for cloud services

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cloud computing has been growing at a staggering rate by offering a flexible and financially attractive venue for businesses and consumers. Within this context, memory allocation has a significant bearing on cloud-based services. Currently, all major cloud service providers support a small set of discrete memory sizes. We propose a cloud computing service that advertises continuous (any) memory request size, while actually supporting a small number of quantized memory sizes. This scheme redefines and transforms the manner in which cloud services are offered to the public by simplifying the ever-increasing level of pricing complexity. Our proposal targets the root causes of complexity. A service provider with a continuous service model will have a distinct advantage over the competition. We utilize mathematical algorithms to quantize and map the continuous (any) memory request sizes into a small number of quantized sizes optimally, with minimal loss. Furthermore, we investigate different factors affecting the continuous model, such as worth structure, size request distribution, total memory size, and granularity. A simulation is used to conduct our study and confirm our findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Ovum is an independent analyst and consultancy firm headquartered in London that specializes in global coverage of IT and telecommunications industries. It began operations in 1985.

  2. The term “Instant type” is used by Amazon to represent a set of predefined (discrete) varying combinations of CPU, memory, storage, and networking capacities. However, other leading cloud service providers use different names. For example, Google Cloud, Microsoft, and IBM call them “machine types,” “Azure virtual machines,” and “flavors,” respectively [6,7,8,9].

  3. Minimizing the lost revenue will behave exactly as maximizing the percentage of successful on-demand requests.

  4. As mentioned previously, real users request data that have not yet been publicly released by cloud service providers [11].

References

  1. International Data Corporation, IDC FutureScape: Worldwide Cloud 2016 Predictions

  2. Deloitte (2017) Technology, Media & Telecommunications Predictions

  3. Manvi S, Shyam GK (2014) Resource management for Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) in cloud computing: a survey. J Netw Comput Appl 41:424–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Madni S et al (2016) Resource scheduling for Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) in cloud computing. J Netw Comput Appl 68:173–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Forrester (2016) https://www.forrester.com/report. September 1

  6. Amazon Web Services, Whitepapers (2017). https://aws.amazon.com/whitepapers/. Retrieved 6 June 2018

  7. Microsoft, Azure (2017). https://azure.microsoft.com. Retrieved 6 June 2018

  8. Google Cloud Platform (2017). https://cloud.google.com. Retrieved 6 June 2018

  9. IBM Cloud (2017). https://www.ibm.com/cloud-computing/. Retrieved 6 June 2018

  10. Amazon Web Services, Instance Types Matrix, Amazon EC2 Instances (2015). http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types. Retrieved 16 May 2017

  11. Mashayekhy L et al (2016) An online mechanism for resource allocation and pricing in clouds. IEEE Trans Comput 65(4):1172–1184

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Butler B (2016) Cloud pricing: it’s (really) complicated. Network World Dec 9, 2013 and 30 November

  13. Ovum, Trends to Watch (2018). https://ovum.informa.com. Retrieved 24 Dec 2017

  14. Kandpal M et al (2017) Role of predictive modeling in cloud services pricing: a survey. In: 7th International Conference on Cloud Computing, Data Science & Engineering—Confluence, Noida, pp 249–254

  15. Arshad S, Ullah S, Khan SA, Awan MD, Khayal MSH (2015) A survey of cloud computing variable pricing models. In: International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE), Barcelona, Spain, pp 27–32

  16. Ren J, Pang L, Cheng Y (2017) Dynamic pricing scheme for IaaS cloud platform based on load balancing: a Q-learning approach. In: Eighth IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), Beijing, pp 806–810. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSESS.2017.8343034

  17. Goudar RH, Tapale MT, Biqe MN (2017) Price negotiation for cloud resource provisioning. In: International Conference On Smart Technologies For Smart Nation (SmartTechCon), Bengaluru, India, pp 1027–1032. https://doi.org/10.1109/SmartTechCon.2017.8358526

  18. Liu C, Li K, Li K, Buyya R (2017) A new cloud service mechanism for profit optimizations of a cloud provider and its users. IEEE Trans Cloud Comput. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCC.2017.2701793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Qiu C, Shen H, Chen L (2018) Towards green cloud computing: demand allocation and pricing policies for cloud service brokerage. IEEE Trans Big Data. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBDATA.2018.2823330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Paul D, Zhong WD, Bose SK (2015) Energy-aware pricing for cloud services. In: International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing (ICICS), Singapore, pp 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICS.2015.7459946

  21. Viana NP, Trinta FADM, Viana JRM, Andrade RMDC, Garcia V, Assad R (2013) aCCountS: a service-oriented architecture for flexible pricing in cloud infrastructure. In: Brazilian Symposium on Software Components, Architectures and Reuse, Brasilia, pp 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1109/SBCARS.2013.16

  22. Mohan SL, Reddy YR, Gangadharan GR (2017) Compac? A pricing model for community cloud. In: International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), Udupi, 2017, pp 2033–2039. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2017.8126144

  23. Luong NC, Wang P, Niyato D, Wen Y, Han Z (2017) Resource management in cloud networking using economic analysis and pricing models: a survey. IEEE CommunSurv Tutor 19(2):954–1001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Alyatama A (2018) Pricing and quantization of memory for cloud services with uniform request distribution. ICIN, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Costea S et al (2013) Resource allocation heuristics for the miriaPOD platform. In: Networking in Education and Research, RoEduNet International Conference 12th Edition, vol.1, no. 6, pp. 26–28

  26. Younis M (2012) Memory allocation technique for segregated free list based on genetic algorithm. J Al-Nahrain Univ 15(2):161–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Selman AH et al (2014) Intelligent memory allocation based on fuzzy Logic. Southeast Eur J Soft Comput 3(1):18–25

    Google Scholar 

  28. Liao X et al (2015) A novel memory allocation scheme for memory energy reduction in virtualization environment. J Comput Syst Sci 81(1):3–15

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Elias D et al (2014) Experimental and theoretical analyses of memory allocation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Gyeongju, Korea, pp 1545–1546, March 24–28

  30. Ben-Yehuda O et al (2014) Ginseng: market-driven memory allocation. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, pp 41–52, March 1–2

  31. Alyatama A et al (2017) Memory allocation algorithm for cloud services. J Supercomput 73(11):5006–5033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. GitHub Writing your own memory allocator June (2015). https://github.com/0x65/apmalloc. Retrieved 24 Dec 2017

  33. Alyatama A (2014) Fairness in orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing optical networks. J High Speed Netw 20:79–93

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lea C, Alyatama A (1992) Bandwidth quantization in the broadband ISDN. IEEE INFOCOM, Florence, Italy

  35. Lea C, Alyatama A (1995) Bandwidth quantization and states reduction in the broadband ISDN. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 3(3):352–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. M/M/1 Queueing System. http://www.eventhelix.com/RealtimeMantra/congestionControl/m_m_1_queue.htm#.WxfBui-B160. Retrieved 6 June 2018

  37. Girard A (1990) Routing and dimensioning in circuit-switched networks. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  38. Datta P et al (2003) A simulated annealing approach for topology planning and evolution of mesh-restorable optical network. In: ONDM, pp 23–40

  39. Kirkpatrick S et al (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220(4598):13

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Rutenbar R (1989) Simulated annealing algorithms: an overview. IEEE Circuits Devices Mag 5(1):19–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kaufman J (1981) Blocking in a shared resource environment. EEE Trans Commun 29:1474–1481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Alyatama A (2017) Computing the single-link performance measurement for elastic optical OFDM. Photon Netw Commun 33(2):125–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Alyatama A (2014) Dynamic spectrum allocation in orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing networks. J Eng Res 2:110–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mell P et al (2011) The NIST definition of cloud computing, NIST SP 800–145. NIST—National Institute of Standards and Technology. U.S, Department of Commerce

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Engineering Department, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait

    Anwar Alyatama & Asmaa Alsumait

  2. Information Science Department, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait

    Maryam Alotaibi

Authors
  1. Anwar Alyatama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Asmaa Alsumait
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maryam Alotaibi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anwar Alyatama.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alyatama, A., Alsumait, A. & Alotaibi, M. Continuous memory allocation model for cloud services. J Supercomput 74, 5513–5538 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2455-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2455-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation