4.3 Article

Cloud service reliability modelling and optimal task scheduling

Journal

IET COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 161-167

Publisher

INST ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY-IET
DOI: 10.1049/iet-com.2016.0417

Keywords

cloud computing; software reliability; scheduling; task analysis; resource allocation; computational complexity; genetic algorithms; Markov processes; optimisation; cloud service reliability modelling; optimal task scheduling; cloud computing; service sharing; network access; configurable computing resources; heterogeneous environment; resource allocation; NP-hard problem; reliability analysis; Markov-based method; cloud scheduling problem; multiobjective optimisation problem; genetic algorithm-based chaotic ant swarm algorithm; GA-CAS algorithm

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61201153]
  2. National 973 Program of China [2012CB315805]
  3. National Key Science and Technology Projects [2010ZX03004-002-02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cloud computing enables service sharing in a massive scale via network access to a pool of configurable computing resources. It has to allocate resources adaptively for tasks and applications to be executed effectively and reliably in a large scale, highly heterogeneous environment. Resource allocation in cloud computing is an NP-hard problem. In this study, the authors conduct a reliability analysis of cloud services by applying a Markov-based method. They formulate the cloud scheduling problem as a multi-objective optimisation problem with constraints in terms of reliability, makespan, and flowtime. Furthermore, they propose a genetic algorithm-based chaotic ant swarm (GA-CAS) algorithm, in which four operators and natural selection are applied, to solve this constrained multi-objective optimisation problem. Simulation results have demonstrated that GA-CAS generally speeds up convergence and outperforms other meta-heuristic approaches.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available