An official website of the United States government
Amazon introduced spot instances in December 2009, enabling “customers to bid on unused Amazon EC2 capacity and run those instances for as long as their bid exceeds the current Spot Price.” Amazon’s real-time computational spot market was novel in multiple respects. For example, it was the first (and to date only) large-scale public implementation of market-based resource allocation based on dynamic pricing after decades of research, and it provided users with useful information, control knobs, and options for optimizing the cost of running cloud applications. Spot instances also introduced the concept of transient cloud servers derived from variable idle capacity that cloud platforms could revoke at any time. Transient servers have since become central to efficient resource management of modern clusters and clouds. As a result, Amazon’s spot market was the motivation for substantial research over the past decade. Yet, in November 2017, Amazon effectively ended its real-time spot market by announcing that users no longer needed to place bids and that spot prices will “...adjust more gradually, based on longer-term trends in supply and demand.” The changes made spot instances more similar to the fixed-price transient servers offered by other cloud platforms. Unfortunately, while these changes made spot instances less complex, they eliminated many benefits to sophisticated users in optimizing their applications. This paper provides a retrospective on Amazon’s real-time spot market, including its advantages and disadvantages for allocating transient servers compared to current fixed-price approaches. We also discuss some fundamental problems with Amazon’s spot market, which we identified in prior work (from 2016), that predicted its eventual end. We then discuss potential options for allocating transient servers that combine the advantages of Amazon’s real-time spot market, while also addressing the problems that likely led to its elimination.
more »
« less
Understanding Synchronization Costs for Distributed ML on Transient Cloud Resources
Cloud platforms often execute parallel batch applications, such as distributed machine learning (ML), that include numerous synchronization barriers. These barriers, which prevent any task from advancing beyond a specified point until all tasks have reached that point, significantly degrade application performance by reducing it to that of the slowest "straggler" task. To address the problem, researchers have proposed numerous straggler mitigation techniques, including speculatively re-executing straggler tasks and various relaxations of strict barrier semantics. While these techniques improve parallel application performance, they incur a cost in terms of the resources wasted re-executing tasks or waiting. Importantly, these costs, which are often implicit in prior work that targets dedicated resources, become explicit in the cloud, which charges for resources at fine-grained intervals. In addition, the cost difference between techniques is exacerbated in cloud platforms, since they charge substantially less for transient resources that effectively yield a probabilistic performance across a wide range. While transient resources' low list price is attractive, revocations increase the frequency and severity of stragglers, which decreases parallel job performance and increases overall execution cost. To better understand the cost of synchronization, we develop simple analytical models of different straggler mitigation techniques and compare their cost and performance on on-demand and transient resources. Our analysis shows that i) transient servers offer complex tradeoffs compared to on-demand servers, and can result in higher overall costs despite their highly discounted price due to their probabilistic performance; ii) common approaches to straggler mitigation, which is a well-studied problem, are less effective using transient servers that cause frequent and severe stragglers; and iii) a recent approach to flexible synchronization offers the best cost and performance.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1802523
- PAR ID:
- 10145404
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2019 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E)
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 145 to 155
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Cloud platforms offer the same VMs under many purchasing options that specify different costs and time commitments, such as on-demand, reserved, sustained-use, scheduled reserve, transient, and spot block. In general, the stronger the commitment, i.e., longer and less flexible, the lower the price. However, longer and less flexible time commitments can increase cloud costs for users if future workloads cannot utilize the VMs they committed to buying. Large cloud customers often find it challenging to choose the right mix of purchasing options to reduce their long-term costs, while retaining the ability to adjust capacity up and down in response to workload variations.To address the problem, we design policies to optimize long-term cloud costs by selecting a mix of VM purchasing options based on short- and long-term expectations of workload utilization. We consider a batch trace spanning 4 years from a large shared cluster for a major state University system that includes 14k cores and 60 million job submissions, and evaluate how these jobs could be judiciously executed using cloud servers using our approach. Our results show that our policies incur a cost within 41% of an optimistic optimal offline approach, and 50% less than solely using on-demand VMs.more » « less
-
Transient computing has become popular in public cloud environments for running delay-insensitive batch and data processing applications at low cost. Since transient cloud servers can be revoked at any time by the cloud provider, they are considered unsuitable for running interactive application such as web services. In this paper, we present VM deflation as an alternative mechanism to server preemption for reclaiming resources from transient cloud servers under resource pressure. Using real traces from top-tier cloud providers, we show the feasibility of using VM deflation as a resource reclamation mechanism for interactive applications in public clouds. We show how current hypervisor mechanisms can be used to implement VM deflation and present cluster deflation policies for resource management of transient and on-demand cloud VMs. Experimental evaluation of our deflation system on a Linux cluster shows that microservice-based applications can be deflated by up to 50% with negligible performance overhead. Our cluster-level deflation policies allow overcommitment levels as high as 50%, with less than a 1% decrease in application throughput, and can enable cloud platforms to increase revenue by 30%more » « less
-
With the technology trend of hardware and workload consolidation for embedded systems and the rapid development of edge computing, there has been increasing interest in supporting parallel real-time tasks to better utilize the multi-core platforms while meeting the stringent real-time constraints. For parallel real-time tasks, the federated scheduling paradigm, which assigns each parallel task a set of dedicated cores, achieves good theoretical bounds by ensuring exclusive use of processing resources to reduce interferences. However, because cores share the last-level cache and memory bandwidth resources, in practice tasks may still interfere with each other despite executing on dedicated cores. Such resource interferences due to concurrent accesses can be even more severe for embedded platforms or edge servers, where the computing power and cache/memory space are limited. To tackle this issue, in this work, we present a holistic resource allocation framework for parallel real-time tasks under federated scheduling. Under our proposed framework, in addition to dedicated cores, each parallel task is also assigned with dedicated cache and memory bandwidth resources. Further, we propose a holistic resource allocation algorithm that well balances the allocation between different resources to achieve good schedulability. Additionally, we provide a full implementation of our framework by extending the federated scheduling system with Intel’s Cache Allocation Technology and MemGuard. Finally, we demonstrate the practicality of our proposed framework via extensive numerical evaluations and empirical experiments using real benchmark programs.more » « less
-
Many organizations maintain and operate large shared computing clusters, since they can substantially reduce computing costs by leveraging statistical multiplexing to amortize it across all users. Importantly, such shared clusters are generally not free to use, but have an internal pricing model that funds their operation. Since employees at many large organizations, especially Universities, have some budgetary autonomy over purchase decisions, internal shared clusters are increasingly competing for users with cloud platforms, which may offer lower costs and better performance. As a result, many organizations are shifting their shared clusters to operate on cloud resources. This paper empirically analyzes the user incentives for shared cloud clusters under two different pricing models using an 8-year job trace from a large shared cluster for a large University system. Our analysis shows that, with either pricing model, a large fraction of users have little financial incentive to participate in a shared cloud cluster compared to directly acquiring resources from a cloud platform. While shared cloud clusters can provide some limited reductions in cost by leveraging reserved instances at a discount, due to bursty workloads, realizing these reductions generally requires imposing long job waiting times, which for many users are likely not worth the cost reduction. In particular, we show that, assuming users defect from the shared cluster if their wait time is greater than 15x their average job runtime, over 80% of the users would defect, which increases the price of the remaining users such that it eliminates any incentive to participate in a shared cluster. Thus, while shared cloud clusters may provide users other benefits, their financial incentives are weak.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1109/IC2E.2019.00029
