mirror of
https://gitlab.com/manzerbredes/paper-lowrate-iot.git
synced 2025-04-19 04:09:43 +00:00
debut formules
This commit is contained in:
parent
5d4f637da7
commit
d80a9837fd
3 changed files with 43 additions and 2 deletions
|
@ -557,8 +557,39 @@ 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
|
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
|
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
|
energy consumption while varying the number of sensors. The values
|
||||||
small-scale systems, the server energy consumption is dominant compared to the energy consumed by the
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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},
|
number={4},
|
||||||
pages={1243-1256},
|
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