Optimal Algorithms for Right-Sizing Data Centers- Extended Version
July 13, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Susanne Albers, Jens Quedenfeld
arXiv ID
1807.05112
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.CC
Citations
20
Venue
ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Electricity cost is a dominant and rapidly growing expense in data centers. Unfortunately, much of the consumed energy is wasted because servers are idle for extended periods of time. We study a capacity management problem that dynamically right-sizes a data center, matching the number of active servers with the varying demand for computing capacity. We resort to a data-center optimization problem introduced by Lin, Wierman, Andrew and Thereska that, over a time horizon, minimizes a combined objective function consisting of operating cost, modeled by a sequence of convex functions, and server switching cost. All prior work addresses a continuous setting in which the number of active servers, at any time, may take a fractional value. In this paper, we investigate for the first time the discrete data-center optimization problem where the number of active servers, at any time, must be integer valued. Thereby we seek truly feasible solutions. First, we show that the offline problem can be solved in polynomial time. Second, we study the online problem and extend the algorithm {\em Lazy Capacity Provisioning\/} (LCP) by Lin et al. to the discrete setting. We prove that LCP is 3-competitive. Moreover, we show that no deterministic online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio smaller than~3. In addition, we develop a randomized online algorithm that is 2-competitive against an oblivious adversary. Moreover, we prove that 2 is a lower bound for the competitive ratio of randomized online algorithms, so our algorithm is optimal. Finally, we address the continuous setting and give a lower bound of~2 on the best competitiveness of online algorithms. This matches an upper bound by Bansal et al. We prove that all lower bounds still hold in a problem variant with more restricted operating cost functions, introduced by Lin et al.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted