International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration (IJATEE) ISSN (P): 2394-5443 ISSN (O): 2394-7454 Vol - 5, Issue - 44, July 2018
  1. 1
    Google Scholar
IRIAL-an improved approach for VM migrations in cloud computing

G. Dalin and V. Radhamani

Abstract

Cloud computing is an emerging technology in internet world. Load balancing is helped to distribute the dynamic workload between multiple nodes to ensure that no single node is overloaded. The proper utilization of resources is achieved by load balancing. Resource intensity aware load balancing (RIAL) method was proposed for load balancing in cloud computing. The resources like CPU, bandwidth, and memory and storage space in physical machines (PMs) are virtualized in the form of virtual machines (VMs) in Cloud computing. The resources in PMs are consumed by each VMs. The various resources in each PM were assigned different weight values based on the resource usage intensity of the PM by RIAL method. Based on the weight values, the VMs were selected from heavily loaded PMs to migrate out other lightly loaded PMs during load balancing operation. The destination PMs were selected to migrate selected VMs by using multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method in which only lightly loaded PMs are considered. In PM, some resources are over utilized while other resources are underutilized. So, it is possible that the heavily loaded PM nearer to PM of selected migration VM might have required resources to balance the load. So in this paper, the VMs which are selected for migration are mapped with destination PMs globally. It is achieved by considering both the lightly loaded and heavily loaded PMs as destination PMs. For global mapping process, the expected completion time of each job in VMs of heavily loaded and lightly loaded PMs are calculated which decides the destination PMs through MCDM method. Hence, load balancing in cloud is further enhanced by improved RIAL (IRIAL) method. The simulation result shows that the proposed IRIAL method has better computational cost, performance degradation and execution time for load balancing in cloud.

Keyword

Cloud computing, Load balancing, Resource intensity aware load balancing, Global map migration.

Cite this article

Refference

[1][1]Singh A, Juneja D, Malhotra M. Autonomous agent based load balancing algorithm in cloud computing. Procedia Computer Science. 2015; 45:832-41.

[2][2]Dave A, Patel B, Bhatt G, Vora Y. Load balancing in cloud computing using particle swarm optimization on Xen Server. In Nirma university international conference on engineering 2017 (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

[3][3]Kaur R, Luthra P. Load balancing in cloud computing. In proceedings of international conference on recent trends in information, telecommunication and computing 2012 (pp.374-81).

[4][4]Chen L, Shen H, Sapra K. RIAL: Resource intensity aware load balancing in clouds. In conference of computer communications 2014 (pp. 1294-302). IEEE.

[5][5]Adhikari M, Amgoth T. Heuristic-based load-balancing algorithm for IaaS cloud. Future Generation Computer Systems. 2018; 81:156-65.

[6][6]Haryani N, Jagli D. Dynamic method for load balancing in cloud computing. IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering. 2014; 16(4):23-8.

[7][7]Gao R, Wu J. Dynamic load balancing strategy for cloud computing with ant colony optimization. Future Internet. 2015; 7(4):465-83.

[8][8]Mondal B, Dasgupta K, Dutta P. Load balancing in cloud computing using stochastic hill climbing-a soft computing approach. Procedia Technology. 2012; 4:783-9.

[9][9]Kumar M, Sharma SC. Deadline constrained based dynamic load balancing algorithm with elasticity in cloud environment. Computers & Electrical Engineering. 2018;69:395-411.

[10][10]Hwang CL, Yoon K. Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg; 1981, p.58-191.

[11][11]Calheiros RN, Ranjan R, Beloglazov A, De Rose CA, Buyya R. CloudSim: a toolkit for modeling and simulation of cloud computing environments and evaluation of resource provisioning algorithms. Software: Practice and Experience. 2011; 41(1):23-50.