mirror of
https://gitlab.com/manzerbredes/paper-lowrate-iot.git
synced 2025-04-19 04:09:43 +00:00
Merge work
Merge branch 'master' of gitlab.inria.fr:lguegan/paper-lowrate-iot
This commit is contained in:
commit
23a92c716b
3 changed files with 43 additions and 2 deletions
|
@ -553,8 +553,39 @@ In our case with small and sporadic network traffic, these results show that wit
|
|||
|
||||
To have an overview of the energy consumed by the overall system, it is important to consider the
|
||||
end-to-end energy consumption. The Figure \ref{fig:end-to-end} represents the end-to-end system
|
||||
energy consumption while varying the number of sensors. Note that, for
|
||||
small-scale systems, the server energy consumption is dominant compared to the energy consumed by the
|
||||
energy consumption while varying the number of sensors. The values
|
||||
are extracted from the experiments presented in the previous
|
||||
section. We detail here the model used to attribute the energy
|
||||
consumption of our application for each part of the
|
||||
architecture. For a given IoT device, we have:
|
||||
1. For the IoT part, the entire consumption of the IoT device
|
||||
belongs to the system's accounted consumption.
|
||||
2. For the network part, the data packets generated by the IoT
|
||||
device travel through network switches, routers and ports that
|
||||
are shared with other trafic.
|
||||
3. For the cloud part, the VM hosthing the data is shared with
|
||||
other IoT devices belonging to the same application and the
|
||||
server hosting the VM also hosts other VMs. Furthermore, the
|
||||
server belongs to a data center and takes part in the overall
|
||||
energy drawn to cool the server room.
|
||||
|
||||
Concerning the sharing of the network costs, for each router, we
|
||||
consider its aggregate bandwidth (on all the ports), its average
|
||||
link utilization and the share taken by our IoT application. For a
|
||||
given network device, we compute our share as follows:
|
||||
|
||||
#+BEGIN_EXPORT latex
|
||||
\[P_{static}^{netdevice} = \frac{P_{static}^{device} \times Bandwidth^{application}}{AggregateBandwidth^{device}
|
||||
\times LinkUtilization^{device}}\]
|
||||
#+END_EXPORT
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
For the sharing of the Cloud costs, we take into account the number
|
||||
of VMs that a server can host, the CPU utilization of a VM and the
|
||||
PUE.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that, for small-scale systems, the server energy consumption
|
||||
is dominant compared to the energy consumed by the
|
||||
sensors. However, since we are using a single server, large-scale sensors deployment lead to an
|
||||
increasing consumption of energy in the IoT part. On the other side, network energy consumption
|
||||
is stable regarding the number of sensors since the system use case does not required large data
|
||||
|
|
BIN
2019-ICA3PP.pdf
BIN
2019-ICA3PP.pdf
Binary file not shown.
|
@ -2514,3 +2514,13 @@ volume={23},
|
|||
number={4},
|
||||
pages={1243-1256},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@ARTICLE{Sun2016,
|
||||
author={X. {Sun} and N. {Ansari} and R. {Wang}},
|
||||
journal={IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials},
|
||||
title={{Optimizing Resource Utilization of a Data Center}},
|
||||
year={2016},
|
||||
volume={18},
|
||||
number={4},
|
||||
pages={2822-2846},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue