{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,19]],"date-time":"2025-06-19T04:26:53Z","timestamp":1750307213092,"version":"3.41.0"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]],"date-time":"2011-12-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1324425600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.acm.org\/publications\/policies\/copyright_policy#Background"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["dl.acm.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Dynamic migration of virtual machines (VMs) across physical servers has the potential to increase the utilization of the servers and hence drive down the data center costs. However, IT practitioners are leery of using this capability for increasing resource utilization due to concerns about the impact of such migrations on the performance of the applications, particularly the response times seen by the users of the applications. The relative newness to the industry of many of the tools used to automate VM migrations for resource utilization; data from researchers; as well as the recommendations from some analysts justify such caution and warrant quantifying the risks as well as potential rewards before deciding how aggressively this capability should be adopted. This paper will discuss the requirements for a benchmark to be used for such quantification. We will also discuss adaptations to SPECvirt sc2010, originally developed as a single server benchmark, to meet these requirements. We will also present risk-reward quantifications obtained using this benchmark for a simple case and the broader use of the benchmark for other cases.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1145\/2160803.2160837","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2012,3,13]],"date-time":"2012-03-13T12:29:14Z","timestamp":1331641754000},"page":"18-18","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Dynamic VM migration"],"prefix":"10.1145","volume":"39","author":[{"given":"Krishnamurthy","family":"Srinivasan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Sterlan","family":"Yuuw","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Tom J.","family":"Adelmeyer","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"320","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]]},"container-title":["ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/2160803.2160837","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,18]],"date-time":"2025-06-18T10:06:41Z","timestamp":1750241201000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.1145\/2160803.2160837"}},"subtitle":["assessing its risks &amp; rewards using a benchmark (abstracts only)"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1145\/2160803.2160837"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/2160803.2160837","relation":{},"ISSN":["0163-5999"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0163-5999"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2011,12,21]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2011-12-21","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}