skip to main content
10.1145/2749246.2749259acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshpdcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Bidding for Highly Available Services with Low Price in Spot Instance Market

Published:15 June 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Amazon EC2 has built the Spot Instance Marketplace and offers a new type of virtual machine instances called as spot instances. These instances are less expensive but considered failure-prone. Despite the underlying hardware status, if the bidding price is lower than the market price, such an instance will be terminated.

Distributed systems can be built from the spot instances to reduce the cost while still tolerating instance failures. For example, embarrassingly parallel jobs can use the spot instances by re-executing failed tasks. The bidding framework for such jobs simply selects the spot price as the bid. However, highly available services like lock service or storage service cannot use the similar techniques for availability consideration. The spot instance failure model is different to that of normal instances (fixed failure probability in traditional distributed model). This makes the bidding strategy more complex to keep service availability for such systems.

We formalize this problem and propose an availability and cost aware bidding framework. Experiment results show that our bidding framework can reduce the costs of a distributed lock service and a distributed storage service by 81.23% and 85.32% respectively while still keeping availability level the same as it is by using on-demand instances.

References

  1. O. Agmon Ben-Yehuda, M. Ben-Yehuda, A. Schuster, and D. Tsafrir. Deconstructing amazon ec2 spot instance pricing. ACM Trans. Econ. Comput., 1(3):16:1--16:20, Sept. 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Y. Amir and A. Wool. Optimal availability quorum systems: Theory and practice. Information Processing Letters, 65(5):223--228, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Andrzejak, D. Kondo, and S. Yi. Decision model for cloud computing under sla constraints. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, MASCOTS '10, pages 257--266, Washington, DC, USA, 2010. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/globalinfrastructure/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/using-spot-limits.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/sla/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. J. Baker, C. Bond, J. C. Corbett, J. Furman, A. Khorlin, J. Larson, J.-M. Léon, Y. Li, A. Lloyd, and V. Yushprakh. Megastore: Providing scalable, highly available storage for interactive services. In CIDR, volume 11, pages 223--234, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. V. Barbu and N. Limnios. Semi-Markov Chains and Hidden Semi-Markov Models Toward Applications: Their Use in Reliability and DNA Analysis. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 1 edition, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. W. J. Bolosky, D. Bradshaw, R. B. Haagens, N. P. Kusters, and P. Li. Paxos replicated state machines as the basis of a high-performance data store. In Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, NSDI'11, pages 141--154, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2011. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. https://github.com/boto/boto.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D. R. Brillinger, P. M. Guttorp, and F. P. Schoenberg. Point processes, temporal. In Encyclopedia of Environmetrics. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. Burrows. The chubby lock service for loosely-coupled distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, OSDI '06, pages 335--350, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2006. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. B. Calder, J. Wang, A. Ogus, N. Nilakantan, A. Skjolsvold, S. McKelvie, Y. Xu, S. Srivastav, J. Wu, H. Simitci, J. Haridas, C. Uddaraju, H. Khatri, A. Edwards, V. Bedekar, S. Mainali, R. Abbasi, A. Agarwal, M. F. u. Haq, M. I. u. Haq, D. Bhardwaj, S. Dayanand, A. Adusumilli, M. McNett, S. Sankaran, K. Manivannan, and L. Rigas. Windows azure storage: A highly available cloud storage service with strong consistency. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, SOSP '11, pages 143--157, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. N. Chohan, C. Castillo, M. Spreitzer, M. Steinder, A. Tantawi, and C. Krintz. See spot run: using spot instances for mapreduce workflows. In Proceedings of the 2nd USENIX conference on Hot topics in cloud computing, pages 7--7. USENIX Association, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J. C. Corbett, J. Dean, M. Epstein, A. Fikes, C. Frost, J. J. Furman, S. Ghemawat, A. Gubarev, C. Heiser, P. Hochschild, W. Hsieh, S. Kanthak, E. Kogan, H. Li, A. Lloyd, S. Melnik, D. Mwaura, D. Nagle, S. Quinlan, R. Rao, L. Rolig, Y. Saito, M. Szymaniak, C. Taylor, R. Wang, and D. Woodford. Spanner: Google's globally-distributed database. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, OSDI'12, pages 251--264, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2012. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. G. DeCandia, D. Hastorun, M. Jampani, G. Kakulapati, A. Lakshman, A. Pilchin, S. Sivasubramanian, P. Vosshall, and W. Vogels. Dynamo: Amazon's highly available key-value store. In Proceedings of Twenty-first ACM SIGOPS Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, SOSP '07, pages 205--220, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. D. K. Gifford. Weighted voting for replicated data. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, SOSP '79, pages 150--162, New York, NY, USA, 1979. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. G. Grimmett and D. Stirzaker. Probability and random processes, volume 2. Oxford Univ Press, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. http://hadoop.apache.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. C. Huang, H. Simitci, Y. Xu, A. Ogus, B. Calder, P. Gopalan, J. Li, and S. Yekhanin. Erasure coding in windows azure storage. In Proceedings of the 2012 USENIX Conference on Annual Technical Conference, USENIX ATC'12, pages 2--2, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2012. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. B. Javadi, R. K. Thulasiramy, and R. Buyya. Statistical modeling of spot instance prices in public cloud environments. In Proceedings of the 2011 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing, UCC '11, pages 219--228, Washington, DC, USA, 2011. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. L. Lamport. Paxos made simple. ACM Sigact News, 32(4):18--25, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. H. Liu. Cutting mapreduce cost with spot market. In Proceedings of the 3rd USENIX Conference on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing, HotCloud'11, pages 6--6, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2011. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Mao and M. Humphrey. A performance study on the vm startup time in the cloud. In Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2012 IEEE 5th International Conference on, pages 423--430, June 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. Mu, K. Chen, Y. Wu, and W. Zheng. When paxos meets erasure code: Reduce network and storage cost in state machine replication. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on High-performance Parallel and Distributed Computing, HPDC '14, pages 61--72, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. D. Peleg and A. Wool. The availability of quorum systems. Information and Computation, 123(2):210--223, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. L. Rizzo. Effective erasure codes for reliable computer communication protocols. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 27(2):24--36, Apr. 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. M. Sathiamoorthy, M. Asteris, D. Papailiopoulos, A. G. Dimakis, R. Vadali, S. Chen, and D. Borthakur. Xoring elephants: novel erasure codes for big data. In Proceedings of the 39th international conference on Very Large Data Bases, PVLDB'13, pages 325--336. VLDB Endowment, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/purchasing-options/spot-instances/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Y. Song, M. Zafer, and K.-W. Lee. Optimal bidding in spot instance market. In INFOCOM, 2012 Proceedings IEEE, pages 190--198. IEEE, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. M. Spasojevic and P. Berman. Voting as the optimal static pessimistic scheme for managing replicated data. Parallel and Distributed Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 5(1):64--73, Jan 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Z. Tong and R. Kain. Vote assignments in weighted voting mechanisms. In Reliable Distributed Systems, 1988. Proceedings., Seventh Symposium on, pages 138--143, Oct 1988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. S. Wee. Debunking real-time pricing in cloud computing. In Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid), 2011 11th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on, pages 585--590, May 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. S. Yi, A. Andrzejak, and D. Kondo. Monetary cost-aware checkpointing and migration on amazon cloud spot instances. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 5(4):512--524, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. S. Yi, D. Kondo, and A. Andrzejak. Reducing costs of spot instances via checkpointing in the amazon elastic compute cloud. In Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2010 IEEE 3rd International Conference on, pages 236--243, July 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Bidding for Highly Available Services with Low Price in Spot Instance Market

              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
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Conferences
                HPDC '15: Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing
                June 2015
                296 pages
                ISBN:9781450335508
                DOI:10.1145/2749246

                Copyright © 2015 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 15 June 2015

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article

                Acceptance Rates

                HPDC '15 Paper Acceptance Rate19of116submissions,16%Overall Acceptance Rate166of966submissions,17%

                Upcoming Conference

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader