skip to main content
research-article

SnowFlock: Virtual Machine Cloning as a First-Class Cloud Primitive

Published:01 February 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

A basic building block of cloud computing is virtualization. Virtual machines (VMs) encapsulate a user’s computing environment and efficiently isolate it from that of other users. VMs, however, are large entities, and no clear APIs exist yet to provide users with programatic, fine-grained control on short time scales.

We present SnowFlock, a paradigm and system for cloud computing that introduces VM cloning as a first-class cloud abstraction. VM cloning exploits the well-understood and effective semantics of UNIX fork. We demonstrate multiple usage models of VM cloning: users can incorporate the primitive in their code, can wrap around existing toolchains via scripting, can encapsulate the API within a parallel programming framework, or can use it to load-balance and self-scale clustered servers.

VM cloning needs to be efficient to be usable. It must efficiently transmit VM state in order to avoid cloud I/O bottlenecks. We demonstrate how the semantics of cloning aid us in realizing its efficiency: state is propagated in parallel to multiple VM clones, and is transmitted during runtime, allowing for optimizations that substantially reduce the I/O load. We show detailed microbenchmark results highlighting the efficiency of our optimizations, and macrobenchmark numbers demonstrating the effectiveness of the different usage models of SnowFlock.

References

  1. Altschul, S. F., Madden, T. L., Schaffer, A. A., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Miller, W., and Lipman, D. J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSI--BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 17, 3389--3402.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Alvarez, G. A., Borowsky, E., Go, S., Romer, T. R., Szendy, R. B. B., Golding, R., Merchant, A., Spasojevic, M., Veitch, A., and Wilkes, J. 2001. Minerva: An automated resource provisioning tool for large-scale storage systems. ACM Trans. Computer Syst. 19, 4, 483--518. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Amazon.com. Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2). http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. ANL. Argonne National Laboratory MPICH2. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/research/projects/mpich2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Apache A. The Apache Software Foundation -- Hadoop. http://hadoop.apache.org/core/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Apache B. The Apache Software Foundation -- Hadoop Distributed File System: Architecture and Design. http://hadoop.apache.org/core/docs/current/hdfs_design.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Apodaka, A. A. and Gritz, L. 2000. Advanced RenderMan: Creating CGI for Motion Pictures. Academic Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Aqsis.org. Aqsis Renderer -- Freedom to Dream. http://aqsis.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Barham, P., Dragovic, B., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Harris, T., Ho, A., Neugebauer, R., Pratt, I., and Warfield, A. 2003. Xen and the art of virtualization. In Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’03). 164--177. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Bartolini, N., Bongiovanni, G., and Silvestri, S. 2009. Self-* through self-learning: Overload control for distributed Web systems. Comput. Netw. 53, 5, 727--743. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Bugnion, E., Devine, S., and Rosenblum, M. 1997. Disco: Running commodity operating systems on scalable multiprocessors. In Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’97). 143--156. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Carns, P. H., Ligon III, W. B., Ross, R. B., and Thakur, R. 2000. PVFS: A parallel file system for Linux clusters. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Linux Showcase and Conference. 317--327. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Chandra, R., Menon, R., Dagum, L., Kohr, D., Maydan, D., and McDonald, J. 2000. Parallel Programming in OpenMP. Elsevier. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Chase, J. S., Irwin, D. E., Grit, L. E., Moore, J. D., and Sprenkle, S. E. 2003. Dynamic virtual clusters in a grid site manager. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing (HPDC’03). 90--103. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Clark, C., Fraser, K., Hand, S., Hansen, J. G., Jul, E., Limpach, C., Pratt, I., and Warfield, A. 2005. Live migration of virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’05). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Cluster Resources. Moab Cluster Suite. http://www.clusterresources.com/pages/products/moab-cluster-suite.php.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Cully, B., Lefebvre, G., Meyer, D., Feeley, M., Hutchinson, N., and Warfield, A. 2008. Remus: High availability via asynchronous virtual machine replication. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’08). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Dean, J. and Ghemawat, S. 2004. MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’04). 137--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Dunlap, G. W., King, S. T., Cinar, S., Basrai, M. A., and Chen, P. M. 2002. ReVirt: Enabling intrusion analysis through virtual-machine logging and replay. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI). 211--224. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. EBI. European Bioinformatics Institute -- ClustalW2. http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/clustalw2/ index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. el Malek, M. A., Wachs, M., Cipar, J., Sanghi, K., Ganger, G. R., Gibson, G. A., and Reiter, M. K. 2009. File system virtual appliances: Portable file system implementations. Tech. rep. CMU-PDL-09-102, Carnegie Mellon University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Elnikety, S., Nahum, E., Tracey, J., and Zwaenepoel, W. 2004. A method for transparent admission control and request scheduling in e-commerce web sites. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’04). 276--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Emeneker, W. and Stanzione, D. 2007. Dynamic virtual clustering. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (Cluster). 84--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Foster, I., Freeman, T., Keahey, K., Scheftner, D., Sotomayor, B., and Zhang, X. 2006. Virtual clusters for grid communities. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid). 513--520. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Fox, A., Gribble, S. D., Chawathe, Y., Brewer, E. A., and Gauthier, P. 1997. Cluster-based scalable network services. In Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’97). 78--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Gabriel, E., Fagg, G. E., Bosilca, G., Angskun, T., Dongarra, J. J., Squyres, J. M., Sahay, V., Kambadur, P., Barrett, B., Lumsdaine, A., Castain, R. H., Daniel, D. J., Graham, R. L., and Woodall, T. S. 2004. Open MPI: Goals, concept, and design of a next generation MPI implementation. In Proceedings of the 11th European PVM/MPI Users’ Group Meeting. 97--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Geist, A., Beguelin, A., Dongarra, J., Jiang, W., Manchek, R., and Sunderam, V. 1994. PVM: Parallel Virtual Machine -- A Users’ Guide and Tutorial for Networked Parallel Computing. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Gentzsch, W. 2001. Sun grid engine: Towards creating a compute power grid. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid’01). 35--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. GoGrid. GoGrid Cloud Hosting. http://www.gogrid.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Gupta, D., Lee, S., Vrable, M., Savage, S., Snoeren, A. C., Varghese, G., Voelker, G. M., and Vahdat, A. 2008. Difference engine: Harnessing memory redundancy in virtual machine. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’08). 309--322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Hibler, M., Stoller, L., Lepreau, J., Ricci, R., and Barb, C. 2003. Fast, scalable disk imaging with Frisbee. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. 283--296.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Hibler, M., Ricci, R., Stoller, L., Duerig, J., Guruprasad, S., Stack, T., Webb, K., and Lepreau, J. 2008. Large-scale virtualization in the emulab network testbed. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. 113--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Higgins, D., Thompson, J., and Gibson, T. 1994. CLUSTAL W: Improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 22, 4673--4680.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Hines, M. and Gopalan, K. 2009. Post-copy based live virtual machine migration using adaptive pre-paging and dynamic self-ballooning. In Proceedings of the Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE’09). 51--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Huang, W., Gao, Q., Liu, J., and Panda, D. K. 2007. High performance virtual machine migration with RDMA over modern interconnects. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (Cluster). 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Huelsenbeck, J. P. and Ronquist, F. 2001. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17, 8, 754--755. http://mrbayes.csit.fsu.edu/.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Kawachiya, K., Ogata, K., Silva, D., Onodera, T., Komatsu, H., and Nakatani, T. 2007. Cloneable JVM: A new approach to start isolated Java applications faster. In Proceedings of the Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE’07). 1--11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Kozuch, M. and Satyanarayanan, M. 2002. Internet suspend/resume. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications (WMCSA’02). 40--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Lagar-Cavilla, H. A., Tolia, N., de Lara, E., Satyanarayanan, M., and O’Hallaron, D. 2007. Interactive resource-intensive applications made easy. In Proceedings of the ACM/IFIP/USENIX 8th International Middleware Conference. 143--163. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Li, K.-B. 2003. ClustalW-MPI: Clustalw analysis using distributed and parallel computing. Bioinformatics 19, 12, 1585--1586. http://www.bii.a-star.edu.sg/achievements/applications/clustalw/index.php.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Lin, B. and Dinda, P. 2005. VSched: Mixing batch and interactive virtual machines using periodic real-time scheduling. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing. 8--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Litty, L., Lagar-Cavilla, H. A., and Lie, D. 2008. Hypervisor support for identifying covertly executing binaries. In Proceedings of the 17th USENIX Security Symposium. 243--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. McLoughlin, M. 2008. The QCOW2 Image Format. http://people.gnome.org/~markmc/qcow-image-format.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. McNett, M., Gupta, D., Vahdat, A., and Voelker, G. 2007. Usher: An extensible framework for managing clusters of virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 21st Large Installation System Adminstration Conference (LISA’07). 167--181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Meyer, D., Aggarwal, G., Cully, B., Lefebvre, G., Hutchinson, N., Feeley, M., and Warfield, A. 2008. Parallax: Virtual disks for virtual machines. In Proceedings of the Eurosys. 41--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Microsoft. 2009. Virtual hard disk image format specification. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualserver/bb676673.aspx.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Mosso. Mosso Cloud Service. http://www.mosso.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Murphy, M. A., Kagey, B., Fenn, M., and Goasguen, S. 2009. Dynamic provisioning of virtual organization clusters. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid’09). 364--371. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Nathuji, R. and Schwan, K. 2007. VirtualPower: Coordinated power management in virtualized enterprise systems. In Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’07). 265--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Nelson, M., Lim, B., and Hutchins, G. 2005. Fast transparent migration for virtual machines. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Nightingale, E. B., Veeraraghavan, K., Chen, P., and Flinn, J. 2006. Rethink the sync. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’06). 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Nishimura, H., Maruyama, N., and Matsuoka, S. 2007. Virtual clusters on the fly -- fast, scalable and flexible installation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid’07). 549--556. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Norris, J., Coleman, K., Fox, A., and Candea, G. 2004. OnCall: Defeating spikes with a free-market application cluster. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC). 198--205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Open vSwitch. An Open Virtual Switch. http://openvswitch.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Pixar. RenderMan. https://renderman.pixar.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Platform Computing. 2006. Platform Enterprise Grid Orchestrator (Platform EGO). http://www.platform.com/Products/platform-enterprise-grid-orchestrator.pNFS.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. pNFS.com. Parallel NFS. http://www.pnfs.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. QuantLib.org. QuantLib: A free/open-source library for quantitative finance. http://quantlib.org/index.shtml.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Ranjan, S., Rolia, J., Fu, H., and Knightly, E. 2003. Qos-driven server migration for internet data centers. In Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS’03). 3--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Red Hat. LVM2 Resource Page. http://sources.redhat.com/lvm2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Ritchie, D. and Thompson, K. 1974. The UNIX time-sharing system. Comm. ACM 17, 7, 365--375. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Rumble, S. M., Lacroute, P., Dalca, A. V., Fiume, M., Sidow, A., and Brudno, M. 2009. SHRiMP: Accurate mapping of short color-space reads. PLoS Comput. Biology 5, 5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Ruth, P., McGachey, P., Jiang, J., and Xu, D. 2005. VioCluster: Virtualization for dynamic computational domains. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (Cluster). 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Samba.org. DISTCC: A Fast, Free Distributed C/C++ Compiler. http://distcc.samba.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Sapuntzakis, C. P., Chandra, R., Pfaff, B., Chow, J., Lam, M. S., and Rosenblum, M. 2002. Optimizing the migration of virtual computers. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSD’02I). 377--390. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. SPEC. 2005. Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation SPECweb2005. http://www.spec.org/web2005/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Steinder, M., Whalley, I., Carrera, D., Gaweda, I., and Chess, D. 2007. Server virtualization in autonomic management of heterogeneous workloads. In Proceedings of the 10th Integrated Network Management (IM) Conference. 139--148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Stone, J. Tachyon Parallel/Multiprocessor Ray Tracing System. http://jedi.ks.uiuc.edu/~johns/raytracer/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Sun Microsystems. Solaris ZFS - Redefining File Systems as Virtualised Storage. http://nz.sun.com/learnabout/solaris/10/ds/zfs.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Surie, A., Lagar-Cavilla, H. A., de Lara, E., and Satyanarayanan, M. 2008. Low-bandwidth vm migration via opportunistic replay. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications (HotMobile). 74--79. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Tolia, N., Kozuch, M., Satyanarayanan, M., Karp, B., Perrig, A., and Bressoud, T. 2003. Opportunistic use of content addressable storage for distributed file systems. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. 127--140.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Tolia, N., Kaminsky, M., Andersen, D. G., and Patil, S. 2006. An architecture for internet data transfer. In Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’06). 253--266. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. Uhlig, V., LeVasseur, J., Skoglund, E., and Dannowski, U. 2004. Towards scalable multiprocessor virtual machines. In Proceedings of the 3rd Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium. 43--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. UofT. University of Toronto -- SnowFlock: Swift VM cloning for cloud computing. http: //sysweb.cs.toronto.edu/snowflock.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Urgaonkar, B. and Shenoy, P. 2008. Cataclysm: Scalable overload policing for internet applications. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 31, 4, 891--920. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Urgaonkar, B., Shenoy, P., Chandra, A., Goyal, P., and Wood, T. 2008. Agile dynamic provisioning of multi-tier internet applications. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 3, 1, 1--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. VASP-Group. VASP -- Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package, Theoretical Physics Department, Vienna. http://cms.mpi.univie.ac.at/vasp/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. VMware. vSphere Resource Management Guide. www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere4/r41/vsp_41_resource_mgmt.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Vrable, M., Ma, J., Chen, J., Moore, D., Vandekieft, E., Snoeren, A., Voelker, G., and Savage, S. 2005. Scalability, fidelity and containment in the potemkin virtual honeyfarm. In Proceedings of the 20th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’05). 148--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Waldspurger, C. A. 2002. Memory resource management in VMware ESX server. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’02). 181--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Warfield, A., Hand, S., Fraser, K., and Deegan, T. 2005. Facilitating the development of soft devices. In Proceedings of the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  82. Whitaker, A., Shaw, M., and Gribble, S. D. 2002. Scale and performance in the denali isolation kernel. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’02). 195--209. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. White, B., Lepreau, J., Stoller, L., Ricci, R., Guruprasad, S., Newbold, M., Hibler, M., Barb, C., and Joglekar, A. 2002. An integrated experimental environment for distributed systems and networks. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’02). 255--270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Wood, T., Shenoy, P., Venkataramani, A., and Yousif, M. 2007. Black-box and gray-box strategies for virtual machine migration. In Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’07). 229--242. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Youseff, L., Wolski, R., Gorda, B., and Krintz, C. 2006. Evaluating the performance impact of xen on MPI and process execution for HPC systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Virtualization Technology in Distributed Computing (VTDC’06). 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. Zayas, E. 1987. Attacking the process migration bottleneck. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles (SOSP’87). 13--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. Zhang, H., Jiang, G., Yoshihira, K., Chen, H., and Saxena, A. 2009. Resilient workload manager: Taming bursty workload of scaling internet applications. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Autonomic Computing and Communications, Industry Session (ICAC-INDST). 19--28. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  88. Zhang, X., Keahey, K., Foster, I., and Freeman, T. 2005. Virtual cluster workspaces for grid applications. Tech. rep. TR-ANL/MCS-P1246-0405, University of Chicago.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. SnowFlock: Virtual Machine Cloning as a First-Class Cloud Primitive

    Recommendations

    Reviews

    Elliot Jaffe

    A somewhat unusual mechanism for achieving parallelism in cloud-based systems is explored in this paper. Traditionally, a cloud server would be instantiated on a multiprocessor, and the developer would run multiple processes or threads to take advantage of the underlying hardware. SnowFlock takes this one step further, allowing a developer to easily and efficiently run copies of the whole virtual machine (VM) on other hardware instances. The challenge is to make this efficient, and SnowFlock does so by using "three key observations. First, it is possible to drastically reduce the time it takes to clone a VM by copying only the critical state and [by] fetching the VM's memory image efficiently on demand." Second, it is possible to significantly reduce the VM memory that must be transferred if the operating system knows about new allocations. Third, the similarity of the memory access patterns among "cloned VMs makes it beneficial to distribute [a] VM state using multicast. This allows for the instantiation of a large number of VMs at a (low) cost similar to that of forking a single copy." The paper is interesting as an alternative approach to cloud design. It is detailed enough to understand and grasp the concepts without getting lost in the specifics of implementation. It is definitely an important paper for cloud designers. Online Computing Reviews Service

    Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

    Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Computer Systems
      ACM Transactions on Computer Systems  Volume 29, Issue 1
      February 2011
      104 pages
      ISSN:0734-2071
      EISSN:1557-7333
      DOI:10.1145/1925109
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2011 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: 1 February 2011
      • Accepted: 1 November 2010
      • Revised: 1 October 2010
      • Received: 1 July 2010
      Published in tocs Volume 29, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader