1 / 13

Abdullah Almurayh MSCS Graduate Candidate Committee members: Dr. Edward Chow (Advisor)

MCEVE. Master Thesis Proposal. A Model for Configuring Efficient Virtualized Environment Based on Multiple Weighted Considerations. Abdullah Almurayh MSCS Graduate Candidate Committee members: Dr. Edward Chow (Advisor) Dr . Chuan Yue Dr . Albert Glock Summer2011.

lula
Download Presentation

Abdullah Almurayh MSCS Graduate Candidate Committee members: Dr. Edward Chow (Advisor)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MCEVE Master Thesis Proposal A Model for Configuring Efficient Virtualized Environment Based on Multiple Weighted Considerations Abdullah Almurayh MSCS Graduate Candidate Committee members: Dr. Edward Chow (Advisor) Dr. ChuanYue Dr. Albert Glock Summer2011

  2. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Outline • Introduction • The Problem • Objectives • The Proposed Solution • Tasks • Deliverables

  3. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Introduction to Virtualization • Widely used technology • Benefits of Virtualization • Consolidation and isolation • Reduced power and cooling • Green computing • Ease of deployment and administration • High availability and disaster recovery • Many companies, datacenters, organizations, universities, and IT have virtualized their servers. • Even Small business and individuals started using their virtualization solutions. • Availability of Low-cost Public Clouds, e.g. Amazon AWS

  4. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh The Problem: • Diversity of virtualization solutions has opened the door to an endless array of choices • Virtualization technologies operate in slightly different manners • Virtualization technologies have different architectures and requirements . • Full-virtualization • Para-virtualization • Operating system-level virtualization • Hardware virtualization • By having vast choices, people sometimes become so confused and unable to choose the right virtualization solutions.

  5. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Trade-off Complexity of Platforms vs. Benchmarks: Native VMware Xen Figure: Passmark – CPU results compared to native (higher values are better)

  6. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Trade-off Complexity of Platforms vs. Benchmarks: Native Xen VMware User-mode Figure : Relative performance of native Linux (L), XenoLinux (X), VMware workstation 3.2 (V) and User-Mode Linux (U). (higher values are better

  7. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Objectives: • To have suggested solutions in easy way and low cost. • The solutions need to be acceptable and reasonable accordingly to the real world. • A user can get more details about the configurations that are usually used in virtualized environments.. • To know the advantages and the disadvantages of suggested virtualized technologies. • A user can get a good overview of configurations that may meet his expectations. • Metrics for evaluating a solution include: • Cost. • Performance.

  8. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh The Proposed Solution: • Develop a model for suggesting better solutions of virtualized environments based on the user weighted considerations. • Use user weighted considerations as inputs for algorithmic outputs Response time Throughput Application Cost Capacity

  9. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Recommendation Algorithm: Start Input{conf0, conf1, conf2,…} Input {weight0, weight1, weight2,…} Input {measure0, measure1, measure2, …}. $best = Max{Mix0, Mix1,…, Mixn} Output ($best) Conf: user configuration Weight: user configuration weight Measure: benchmark measurements W: Weight value M: measurement value Mix: overall calculation n: number of existing specification best: best selection of the overall results If (n) Yes No End

  10. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Competed Tasks Research done during Fall 2010 : • Research virtualization technology characteristics, types, and architectures. • Read and used some common virtualization platforms. • Demonstrate the possibility of their usability in the real world. Work done during Spring 2011: • Figure out a development algorithm for the Model. • Perform algorithms for generating the Model requirements to represent real world measurements that can be used in the Model. • Research the most important considerations that can be used in the Model. • Collect existing information, facts, considerations, and the like for virtualized environments.

  11. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Task in Progress Estimated completion in Summer 2011: • Implement, test, and analyze the Model application. • Perform experiments on the Model and analyzing the accuracy of results. • Report the process of the research with all explanations, facts, implementations, experiments. • Prepare a Demo of the Model in real world and showing how the results can meet a user’s expectations.

  12. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh Deliverables • A thesis report documenting aspects of the virtualization technology and the problems relative to the diverse solutions for virtualizing environments. • A web-based working prototype for demonstration of the developed model for virtualizing computers

  13. MCEVE / Abdullah Almurayh References [1] VMware, "Virtualization Overview",http://www.vmware.com/pdf/virtualization.pdf [2] VMware, "Disaster Recovery Virtualization",www.vmware.com/files/pdf/DR_VMware_DoubleTake.pdf [3] Comparison of platform virtual machines, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_platform_virtual_machines [4] http://www.intel.com/technology/virtualization/technology.htm [5] http://sites.amd.com/us/business/it-solutions/virtualization/Pages/amd-v.aspx [6] Wikipedia, "Comparison of application virtual machines",http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_application_virtual_machines [7] VMware , A Performance Comparison of Hypervisors, VMware Inc. 2007. http://www.cc.iitd.ernet.in/misc/cloud/hypervisor_performance.pdf [8] P. Barham, B. Dragovic, K. Fraser, S. Hand, T. Harris, A. Ho, et al. Xen and the art of virtualization. In Proc. Of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles, Bolton Landing, NY, Oct. 2003. [9] VMware, "A Performance Comparison of Hypervisors". http://www.cc.iitd.ernet.in/misc/cloud/hypervisor_performance.pdf [10] The Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. http://www.spec.org. [11] Virtualization. http://www.spec.org/benchmarks.html#virtual. [12] SPECvirt_sc2010 Results. SPEC. 2010. http://www.spec.org/virt_sc2010/results/ [13] Performance Details. SPEC. 2010. http://www.spec.org/virt_sc2010/results/res2011q2/virt_sc2010-20110420-00028-perf.html#Performance Details [14] VMware Cost-Per- Application Calculator Methodology. VMware. 2011. http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vmware-cost-per-application-calculator- methodology.pdf [15] VMware vSphere™ 4.1 Pricing, Packaging and Licensing Overview. VMware. August, 2010. http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vsphere_pricing.pdf

More Related