Reciprocity and stabilization in dynamic resource reallocation among logically partitioned systems

• US 7,313,796 B2
• Filed: 06/05/2003
• Issued: 12/25/2007
• Est. Priority Date: 06/05/2003
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: Google LLC (Alphabet Inc.)
• Original Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Inventors: Hamilton, Rick Allen II, Seaman, James Wesley
• Primary Examiner(s): An, Meng-Ai T.
• Assistant Examiner(s): WAI, ERIC CHARLES
• Application Number:
  US10/455,182
• Publication Number:
  US 20040250250A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,664 Days
• Field of Search: 718/104
• US Class Current: 718/104
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/5077 Logical partitioning of resources; Management or configuration of virtualized resources specific details on emulation or internal functioning of virtual machines G06F9/455
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/5083 Techniques for rebalancing the load in a distributed system

Abstract

A method and system for achieving stability while reallocating resources in a logically partitioned environment. The present invention comprises Performance Enhancement Program (PEP), Classification Program (CP), System Analysis Program (SAP), and System Evaluation Program (SEP). PEP allows a user to enter several performance parameters. CP classifies each of the virtual systems in the managed system based on their workload. SAP analyses the managed system to determine the configuration of the managed system. Managed systems configurations are classified according to the reciprocity of resource allocation and the overall symmetry of the managed systems. SEP evaluates the configuration of the managed system and recommends alterations for improved performance of the managed system. The managed system will be optimized when the functional differentiator (FD) of the virtual systems is small enough to allow reallocation of resources without an unacceptable sacrifice in managed system stability.

Claims

1. A computer implemented method for optimizing resource reallocation in a managed computer system comprising:

using a computer, classifying each of a plurality of virtual systems it the managed computer system as either recipient-only (Ro), primarily recipient, but possibly donor (Rd), equally weighted as donor or recipient (RD), primarily donor, but possibly recipient (Dr), or donor-only (Do);

determining the configuration of the managed system and calculating a functional differentiator for each of the plurality of virtual systems within the managed computer system by calculating a difference between a donor load threshold and a recipient load threshold for each of the plurality of virtual systems;

wherein a virtual system is classified as an Rd system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as an Ro system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Dr system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Do system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a RD system when the average workload is less than or equal to the recipient load threshold and the average workload is greater than or equal to the donor load threshold;

wherein a configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Ro virtual system and a Do virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains a Ro virtual system or a Do virtual system, but not both;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains only a RD virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as fully reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein the functional differentiator measures how readily a virtual system will switch from a donor to a recipient, or vice versa; and

wherein a first functional differentiator value range indicates a stable virtual system, but one that does not reallocate resources well, and a second functional differentiator value range indicates a system that readily reallocates resources, but at a sacrifice in a stability of the managed computer system;

wherein the managed computer system will be optimized when each of the plurality of virtual systems has a functional differentiator value in a third range that allows reallocation of resources without an unacceptable sacrifice in a managed system stability.

2. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, changing the Ro virtual system to a Rd virtual system.

3. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, changing the Do virtual system to a Dr virtual system.

4. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, determining whether the managed system is performing acceptably.

5. The computer implemented method of claim 4 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large;

and responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large, decreasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

6. The computer implemented method of claim 4 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large;

and responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of the virtual system is not large, increasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

7. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal symmetric configuration, determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large; and

responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of the virtual system is large, decreasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

8. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal symmetric configuration, determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large; and

responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of the virtual system is not large, increasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

9. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system contains a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, decreasing the donor load threshold of the Dr system.

10. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system contains a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, decreasing the recipient load threshold of a RD system.

11. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system does not contain a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, increasing the recipient load threshold of a Rd system.

12. The computer implemented method of claim 1 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system does not contain a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, increasing the donor load threshold of a RD system.

13. A program product for causing a computer to optimize a dynamic logical partitioning of a managed computer system, through allocation of resources within a plurality of virtual systems in the managed computer system, and based on an ability of a donor system to donate resources and a need of a recipient system to receive resources, said program product comprising:

a computer-usable medium;

wherein said computer usable medium comprises a plurality of instructions encoded thereon comprising;

instructions for classifying each of the plurality of virtual systems as either recipient-only (Ro), primarily recipient, but possibly donor (Rd), equally weighted as donor or recipient (RD), primarily donor, but possibly recipient (Dr), or donor-only (Do);

instructions for calculating a functional differentiator for each of a plurality of virtual systems within the managed computer system by calculating a difference between a donor load threshold and a recipient load threshold for each of the plurality of virtual systems;

instructions for determining the configuration of a managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is fully reciprocal, determining whether the managed system is performing acceptably;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is performing acceptably, instructions for determining that the managed system is optimized;

wherein the virtual system is classified as an Rd system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as an Ro system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Dr system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Do system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a RD system when the average workload is less than or equal to the recipient load threshold and the average workload is greater than or equal to the donor load threshold;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Ro virtual system and a Do virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains a Ro virtual system or a Do virtual system, but not both;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains only a RD virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as fully reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein the functional differentiator measures how readily a virtual system will switch from a donor to a recipient or vice versa;

wherein a first functional differentiator value range indicates a stable virtual system, but one that does not reallocate resources well, and a second functional differentiator value range indicates a system that readily reallocates resources, but at a sacrifice in a stability of the managed computer system;

wherein the managed computer system will be optimized when each of the plurality of virtual systems has a functional differentiator value in a third range that allows reallocation of resources without an unacceptable sacrifice in a managed system stability.

14. The program product of claim 13 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, instructions, for determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, instructions for changing the Ro virtual system to a Rd virtual system.

15. The program product of claim 13 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, instructions for determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, instructions for changing the Do virtual system to a Dr virtual system.

16. The program product of claim 13 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is partially reciprocal, instructions for determining whether the managed system is a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not a Do, Ro, or Do-Ro configuration, instructions for determining whether the managed system is performing acceptably.

17. The program product of claim 16 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, instructions for determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large;

and responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large, instructions for decreasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

18. The program product of claim 16 wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, instructions for determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large;

and responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of a virtual system is not large, instructions for increasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

19. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal symmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large;

and responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large, instructions for decreasing the functional differentiator of the viral system.

20. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal symmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the functional differentiator of a virtual system is large; and

responsive to a determination that the functional differentiator of a virtual system is not large, instructions for increasing the functional differentiator of the virtual system.

21. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system contains a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, instructions for decreasing the donor load threshold of the Dr system.

22. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system contains a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed, system is not performing acceptably, instructions for decreasing the recipient load threshold of a RD system.

23. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system does not contain a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, instructions for increasing the recipient load threshold of a Rd system.

24. The program product of claim 13 wherein the determination of the reciprocity includes a determination of the configuration of the managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that a managed system is a fully reciprocal asymmetric configuration, instructions for determining whether the managed system contains a Dr virtual system; and

responsive to a determination that the virtual system does not contain a Dr virtual system and responsive to a determination that the managed system is not performing acceptably, instructions for increasing the donor load threshold of a RD system.

25. A program product for causing a computer to optimize a dynamic logical partitioning of a managed computer system, through allocation of resources within a plurality of virtual systems in the managed computer system, based on an ability of a donor system to donate resources and a need of a recipient system to receive resources, said program product comprising:

a computer-usable medium;

wherein said computer usable medium comprises;

a performance enhancement program encoded thereon;

a classification program encoded thereon;

a system analysis program encoded thereon; and

a system evaluation program encoded thereon;

wherein the classification program comprises a first plurality of instructions, the first plurality of instructions comprising;

instructions for obtaining an average workload for each of a plurality of virtual systems in the managed computer system;

instructions for comparing the average workload a donor load threshold or a recipient load threshold for each of the plurality of virtual systems in the managed computer system;

instructions for classifying each of the plurality of virtual systems as either recipient-only (Ro), primarily recipient, but possibly donor (Rd), equally weighted as donor or recipient (RD), primarily donor, but possibly recipient (Dr), or donor-only (Do);

wherein the system analysis program comprises a second plurality of instructions, the second plurality of instructions comprising;

instructions for determining a reciprocity of a plurality of virtual systems in a managed system;

instructions for determining a symmetry of the managed system; and

responsive to the determination of reciprocity and the determination of symmetry, instructions for classifying the configuration of the managed system;

wherein the system evaluation program comprises a third plurality of instructions, the third plurality of instructions comprising;

instructions for determining the configuration of a managed system;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is fully reciprocal, determining whether the managed system is performing acceptably;

wherein responsive to a determination that the managed system is performing acceptably, instructions for determining that the managed system is optimized;

wherein a virtual system is classified as an Rd system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual systems is classified as an Ro system when the average workload is greater than the recipient load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Dr system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system can donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a Do system when the average workload is less than the donor load threshold and the virtual system cannot donate a resource;

wherein the virtual system is classified as a RD system when the average workload is less than or equal to the recipient load threshold and the average workload is greater than or equal to the donor load threshold;

wherein a configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Ro virtual system and a Do virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a partially reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains a Ro virtual system or a Do virtual system, but not both;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains only a RD virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as a fully reciprocal symmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein the configuration of the managed system is classified as fully reciprocal asymmetric system when the managed system contains both a Rd virtual system and a Dr virtual system;

wherein a functional differentiator measures bow readily a virtual system will switch from a donor to a recipient, or vice versa;

wherein a first functional differentiator value range indicates a stable virtual system, but one that does not reallocate resources well, and a second functional differentiator value range indicates a system that readily reallocates resources, but at a sacrifice in a stability of the managed computer system; and

wherein the managed computer system will be optimized when each of the plurality of virtual systems has a functional differentiator value in a third range that allows reallocation of resources without an unacceptable sacrifice in a managed system stability.