Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ATSDS: adaptive two-stage deadline-constrained workflow scheduling considering run-time circumstances in cloud computing environments

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A significant aspect of cloud computing is scheduling of a large number of real-time concurrent workflow instances. Most of the existing scheduling algorithms are designed for a single complex workflow instance. This study examined instance-intensive workflows bounded by SLA constraints, including user-defined deadlines.The scheduling method for these workflows with dynamic workloads should be able to handle changing conditions and maximize the utilization rate of the cloud resources. The study proposes an adaptive two-stage deadline-constrained scheduling (ATSDS) strategy that considers run-time circumstances of workflows in the cloud environment. The stages are workflow fragmentation and resource allocation.In the first stage, the workflows according to cloud run-time circumstances (number of Virtual Machines (VMs) and average available bandwidth) are dynamically fragmented. In the second stage, using the workflow deadline and the capacity of the VMs, the workflow fragments created are allocated to the VMs to be executed. The simulation results show improvements in terms of workflow completion time, number of messages exchanged, percentage of workflows that meet the deadline and VM usage cost compared to other approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Workflow management coalition (1999) Workflow management coalition terminology & glossary. http://www.wfmc.org/

  2. Xu R, Liu X, Xie Y, Wang F, Zhang Ch (2014) Logistics scheduling based on cloud business workflows. In: IEEE 18th Int. Conf. Comput. Support. Coop. Work Des

  3. Liu X, Ni Z, Yuan D, Jiang Y, Wu Z, Chen J (2011) A novel statistical time-series pattern based interval forecasting strategy for activity durations in workflow systems. J. Syst. Softw. 84:354–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Safi-Esfahani F, Azmi Murad M, Nasir Sulaiman M (2011) Run-time adaptable business process decentralization. Third Int. Conf. Information, Process. Knowl. Manag., no. c, pp 76–82

  5. Li G, Muthusamy V (2010) A distributed service oriented architecture for business process execution. ACM Trans. Web, vol. V

  6. Sudha M, Monica M (2012) Dynamic adaptive workflow scheduling for instance intensive cloud applications. J Expert Syst (JES), vol. 1, No. 1, Copyr. World Sci. Publ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 31–36

  7. Tan W (2007) Dynamic workflow model fragmentation for distributed execution. Comput Ind 58(5):381–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Atluri V, Chun S, Mukkamala R (2007) A decentralized execution model for inter-organizational workflows. Distrib Parallel Databases, pp. 55–83

  9. Wu Z, Liu X, Z Ni (2013) A market-oriented hierarchical scheduling strategy in cloud workflow systems. J Supercomput, Springer Sci. Media, LLC 63(1):256–293

  10. Zhang F, Cao J, Hwang K, Li K, U. Khan S (2015) Adaptive workflow scheduling on cloud computing platforms with iterative ordinal optimization. IEEE Trans Cloud Comput, vol 7161

  11. Hoenisch P, Schulte S, Dustdar Sh (2013) Workflow scheduling and resource allocation for cloud-based execution of elastic processes. IEEE 6th Int. Conf. Serv. Comput, Appl, 2013

  12. Banerjee S, Adhikari M, Kar S, Biswas U (2015) Development and analysis of a new cloudlet allocation strategy for QoS improvement in cloud. Arab J Sci Eng 40:409–1425

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Mohialdeen IA (2013) Comparative study of scheduling al-grotihms in cloud computing. J Comput Sci 9(2):252–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mendling J, Lassen KB (2006) On the transformation of control flow between block-oriented and graph-oriented process modeling languages. Inderscience Enterp. Ltd

  15. Kopp O, Martin D, Wutke D, Leymann F (2008) On the choice between graph-based and block-structured business process modeling languages. Model. betrieblicher Informations Syst. (MobIS 2008), Saarbrücken

  16. Nguyen BT, Nguyen DH, Nguyen TT (2014) Translation from BPMN to BPEL, current techniques and limitations. Copyr. 2014 ACM 978-1-4503-2930-9/14/12, pp 21–30

  17. Mancioppi M, Danylevych O, Karastoyanova D (2011) Toward classification criteria for Process fragmentation techniques. 7th Int. Work. Bus. Process Des., pp 1–12

  18. Guo L, Robertson D, Burger Y (2005) A novel approach for enacting the distributed business workflows using BPEL4WS on the multi-agent platform. In: Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Ebus. Eng. Washington, DC, pp 657–664

  19. Viroli M, Denti E, Ricci A (2007) Engineering a BPEL orchestration engine as a multi-agent system. Sci Comput Program 66(3):226–245

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Baresi L, Maurino A (2006) Towards Distributed BPEL Orchestrations. Electron. Commun. EASST, vol. 3

  21. Baeyens T (2013) BPM in the cloud. Springer, Berlin, LNCS 8094, pp 10–16

  22. Khalaf R, Kopp O (2008) Maintaining data dependencies across BPEL process fragments. Int J Coop Inf Syst 17:259–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Khalaf R (2006) E Role-based decomposition of business processes using BPEL. IEEE Int. Conf, Web Serv

  24. Fdhila W, Yildiz U (2009) A flexible approach for automatic process decentralization using dependency tables University of California. IEEE 7th Int. Conf. Web Serv., ICWS

  25. Sadiq W, Sadiq S (2006) Model driven distribution of collaborative business processes. IEEE Int. Conf. Serv. Comput., pp 1–4

  26. Zhai Y, Su H (2007) A data flow optimization based approach for BPEL processes partition. IEEE Int. Conf. E-bus. Eng., pp 410–413

  27. Cheng J (2012) An agent-oriented approach to process partition and planning in migrating workflow systems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 25(4):837–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Safi-Esfahani F, Azmi Murad M, Nasir Sulaiman M (2011) Adaptable decentralized service oriented architecture. J Syst Softw 84(10):1591–1617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Teng F, Yang H, Li T, Yang Y (2013) Scheduling real-time workflow on mapreduce-based Cloud. 978-1-4799-0048-0/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE, pp 117–122

  30. Arabnia HR (1990) A parallel algorithm for the arbitrary rotation of digitized images using process-and-data-decomposition approach. J Parallel Distrib Comput, pp 188–192

  31. Arabnia HR (1993) Downloaded from Iran library: (http://www.libdl.ir) | Sponsored by Tehran Business School (http://www.tbs.ir). In: Proc. 7th Annu. Int. High Perform. Comput. Conf. (1993) High Perform. Comput. New Horizons Supercomput. Symp. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June, pp 349–357

  32. Arabnia HR (1989) A transputer network for fast operations on digitised images. Int J Eurograph. Assoc. (Comput. Graph. Forum) 8(1):3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Arabnia HR, Oliver MA (1987) Arbitrary rotation of raster images with SIMD machine architectures. Int. J. Eurographics Assoc. (Computer Graph. Forum), 6(1):3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Arabnia H. R (1995) A distributed stereocorrelation algorithm. In: Proc. Comput. Commun. Networks (ICCCN’95), IEEE, pp 479-482

  35. Arabnia HR (1986) Operations on raster images with SIMD machine architectures. Int. J. Eurograph. Assoc. (Comput. Graph. Forum) 5(3):179–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Arabnia HR (1996) Parallel stereocorrelation on a reconfigurable multi-ring network. J Supercomput, Springer Publ. vol. 10, No. 3, pp 243–270, vol 269, pp 243–269

  37. Bhandarkar S, Arabnia HR (1995) The Hough transform on a reconfigurable multi-ring network. Parallel Distrib Comput 24(1):107–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wani MA, Arabnia HR (2003) Parallel polygon approximation algorithm targeted at reconfigurable multi-ring hardware. J Supercomput 25(1):43–63

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhu M, Cao F (2014) High-throughput scientific workflow scheduling under deadline constraint in clouds. J Commun 9(4):312–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Liu K, Jin H, Chen J, Liu X, Yuan D (2010) A compromised-time-cost scheduling algorithm in SwinDeW-C for instance-intensive cost-constrained workflows on cloud computing platform. Int J High Perform Comput Appl 24(2010):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  41. Li H, Ge S, Zhang L (2014) A QoS-based scheduling algorithm for instance-intensive workflows in cloud environment. Control Decis. Conf. (2014 CCDC), 26th Chinese, pp 4094–4099

  42. Topcuoglu H, Hariri S, Wu M (2002) Performance-effective and low-complexity. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 13(3):260–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Vega D (2010) Towards fuzzy granularity control in parallel/ distributed computing. Int J Child Comput Interact, pp 43–55

  44. Moens H, Handekyn K (2013) Cost-aware scheduling of deadline-constrained task workflows in public cloud environments. 978-3-901882-50-0c 2013 IFIP, pp 68–75

  45. Ghafarian T (2013) Deadline-constrained workflow scheduling in volunteer computing systems. Springer Int. Publ. Switz

  46. Mao M, Humphrey M (2011) Auto-scaling to minimize cost and meet application deadlines in cloud workflows. SC11, Novemb. 12–18, 2011, Seattle, Washington, USA Copyr. 2011 ACM 978-1-4503-0771

  47. Ramakrishnan L, Chase JS, Gannon D, Nurmi D, Wolski R (2011) Deadline-sensitive workflow orchestration without explicit resource control. J Parallel Distrib Comput 71(3):343–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Harper jS, Wilcox DV (2000) A toolset for the performance prediction of parallel and distributed systems. Int J High Perform Comput Appl 14(3):228–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Cooper K, Dasgupta A, Kennedy K, Koelbel C, Mandal A, Marin G, Mazina M, Berman F, Casanova H, Chien A, Dail H, Liu X, Olugbile A, Sievert O, Xia H, Johnsson L, Liu B, Patel M, Reed D, Deng W, Mendes C (2004) New grid scheduling and rescheduling methods in the GrADS project. NSF Next Gener. Softw. Work. Int. Parallel Distrib. Process. Symp. St. Fe, IEEE CS Press. Los Alamitos, CA, USA

  50. Jang S, Wu X, Taylor V, Texas A, Station C, Mehta G, Vahi K, Deelman E, Way A, Del Rey M, (2004) Using performance prediction to allocate grid resources. Tech. Rep. 2004-25, GriPhyN Proj. USA, pp 1–11

  51. Mostinckx S, Van Cutsem T, Timbermont S, Boix E.G, Tanter E, De Meuter W (2011) CloudSim: a toolkit for modeling and simulation of cloud computing environments and evaluation of resource provisioning algorithms. Softw. Pract. Exp. Publ. Wiley Online Libr., vol 39, no. 7, pp 661–699

  52. Li G, Muthusamy V, Jacobsen H (2010) A distributed service-oriented architecture for business process execution. ACM Trans. Web, 4(1)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Science and Research branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    Reihaneh Khorsand & Mehran Mohsenzade

  2. Faculty of Computer Engineering, Najafabad branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

    Faramarz Safi-Esfahani & Naser Nematbakhsh

Authors
  1. Reihaneh Khorsand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Faramarz Safi-Esfahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Naser Nematbakhsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehran Mohsenzade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reihaneh Khorsand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khorsand, R., Safi-Esfahani, F., Nematbakhsh, N. et al. ATSDS: adaptive two-stage deadline-constrained workflow scheduling considering run-time circumstances in cloud computing environments. J Supercomput 73, 2430–2455 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-016-1928-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-016-1928-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation