skip to main content
10.1145/3338906.3341185acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

VARYS: an agnostic model-driven monitoring-as-a-service framework for the cloud

Published: 12 August 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Cloud systems are large scalable distributed systems that must be carefully monitored to timely detect problems and anomalies. While a number of cloud monitoring frameworks are available, only a few solutions address the problem of adaptively and dynamically selecting the indicators that must be collected, based on the actual needs of the operator. Unfortunately, these solutions are either limited to infrastructure-level indicators or technology-specific, for instance, they are designed to work with OpenStack but not with other cloud platforms. This paper presents the VARYS monitoring framework, a technology-agnostic Monitoring-as-a-Service solution that can address KPI monitoring at all levels of the Cloud stack, including the application-level. Operators use VARYS to indicate their monitoring goals declaratively, letting the framework to perform all the operations necessary to achieve a requested monitoring configuration automatically. Interestingly, the VARYS architecture is general and extendable, and can thus be used to support increasingly more platforms and probing technologies.

References

[1]
5gPPP. 2014. NGPaaS: Next Generation Platform as a Service. https://5g-ppp.eu/ ngpaas/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[2]
G. Aceto, A. Botta, W. de Donato, and A. Pescapè. 2013. Cloud monitoring: A survey. Computer Networks 57, 9 (2013), 2093–2115.
[3]
Amazon Web Services, Inc. 2019. CloudWatch. https://aws.amazon.com/it/ cloudwatch/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[4]
Armin Ronacher. 2019. Flask (A Python Microframework). http://flask.pocoo.org/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[5]
D. Bernstein. 2014. Containers and Cloud: From LXC to Docker to Kubernetes. IEEE Cloud Computing 1, 3 (2014), 81–84.
[6]
B. Burns and D. Oppenheimer. 2016. Design Patterns for Container-based Distributed Systems. In Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud).
[7]
Rajkumar Buyya, Chee Shin Yeo, Srikumar Venugopal, James Broberg, and Ivona Brandic. 2009. Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms: Vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility. Future Generation computer systems 25, 6 (2009), 599–616.
[8]
Jose Alcaraz Calero and Juan Gutierrez Aguado. 2015. MonPaaS: an adaptive monitoring platform as a service for cloud computing infrastructures and services. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing 8, 1 (2015), 65–78. 1109/TSC.2014.2302810
[9]
Elasticsearch BV. 2018. The Elastic Stack. https://www.elastic.co/products. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[10]
Elasticsearch B.V. 2019. Elasticsearch Beats - Lightweight Data Shippers. https: //www.elastic.co/products/beats/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[11]
Elasticsearch BV. 2019. Elasticsearch: RESTful, Distributed Search & Analytics. https://www.elastic.co/products/elasticsearch. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[12]
Evan You and contributors. 2019. Introduction - Vue.js. https://vuejs.org/v2/ guide/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[13]
gRPC. 2019. gRPC. https://grpc.io/. {Online; accessed 10-May-2019}.
[14]
Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Development LP. 2017. Monasca - an OpenStack Community project. http://http://monasca.io/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[15]
ISO. 2011. ISO/IEC TS 25010:2011(en) Systems and software engineering — Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) — System and software quality models. ISO. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[16]
ISO. 2017. ISO/IEC TS 25011:2017(en) Information technology — Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) — Service quality models. ISO. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[17]
Anthony D JoSEP, RAnDy KAtz, AnDy KonWinSKi, LEE Gunho, DAViD PAttERSon, and ARiEL RABKin. 2010. A view of cloud computing. Commun. ACM 53, 4 (2010).
[18]
Hamzeh Khazaei, Rajsimman Ravichandiran, Byungchul Park, Hadi Bannazadeh, Ali Tizghadam, and Alberto Leon-Garcia. 2017. Elascale: Autoscaling and Monitoring As a Service. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (CASCON ’17). IBM Corp., Riverton, NJ, USA, 234–240. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3172795.3172823 eventplace: Markham, Ontario, Canada.
[19]
MongoDB, Inc. 2019. MongoDB. https://www.mongodb.com/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[20]
R. Nasim and A. J. Kassler. 2014. Deploying OpenStack: Virtual Infrastructure or Dedicated Hardware. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops.
[21]
M. Orrú, M. Mobilio, A. Shatnawi, O. Riganelli, A. Tundo, and L. Mariani. 2018. Model-Based Monitoring for IoTs Smart Cities Applications. In 4th Italian Conference on ICT for Smart Cities And Communities i-CiTies 2018.
[22]
Prometheus Authors. 2019. Exporters and Integrations. https://prometheus.io/ docs/instrumenting/exporters/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[23]
Prometheus Authors. 2019. Prometheus. https://prometheus.io/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[24]
F. Sabahi. 2011. Cloud computing security threats and responses. In 2011 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Communication Software and Networks. 245–249.
[25]
Salvatore Sanfilippo and contributors. 2019. Redis.io. https://redis.io/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[26]
A. Shatnawi, M. Orrú, M. Mobilio, O. Riganelli, and L. Mariani. 2018. CloudHealth: A Model-Driven Approach to Watch the Health of Cloud Services. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Software Health (SoHeal 2018). ACM/IEEE, 40–47.
[27]
The Apache Software Foundation. 2019. Apache Kafka. https://kafka.apache.org/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[28]
The Kubernetes Authors. 2019. Kuernetes. https://kubernetes.io/it/ {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[29]
The OpenStack Foundation. 2019. OpenStack. https://www.openstack.org/. {Online; accessed 15-May-2019}.
[30]
D. Trihinas, G. Pallis, and M. D. Dikaiakos. 2014. JCatascopia: Monitoring Elastically Adaptive Applications in the Cloud. In 2014 14th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing. 226–235.
[31]
Luis M. Vaquero, Luis Rodero-Merino, and Rajkumar Buyya. 2011. Dynamically Scaling Applications in the Cloud. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41, 1 (Jan. 2011), 45–52.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ESEC/FSE 2019: Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
August 2019
1264 pages
ISBN:9781450355728
DOI:10.1145/3338906
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]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 August 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Cloud computing
  2. Monitoring Framework
  3. Monitoring-as-a-Service

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

ESEC/FSE '19
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 112 of 543 submissions, 21%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)87
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)24
Reflects downloads up to 05 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media