Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
A Comprehensive Review on Cloud
Storage Monitoring
K. Suresha
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
D R R Government Polytechnic
Davanagere, Karnataka, India
Abstract:-Cloud Computing is used for the provision of
Information access over the internet for both
technological and economic purposes .In recent years,
theCloud computing Services has grown very rapid and
sharp, therebyincreasing the sophistication of the
technology behind these services. Effectively and
efficientlyMonitoring is required to run and maintain
such complex infrastructures properly.
Cloud storage properties, characteristics underlying
technologies have been surveyed by several works of
literature, existing workslack of comprehensive cloud
Monitoring study .to fill this gap, we provide a cloud
Monitoring survey. We begin evaluation of Cloud
Monitoring motives, including concepts and context as
well.Then,we systematically examine and explore the
properties of a cloud management framework, the
problems resulting from such properties, and How
literature has approached those concerns. We also
identify existing systems both Commercial and Open
Source and Cloud management software, how they
contribute to the previously described properties and
problems,finally,in the area of cloud management we
recognize open issues, key problems and potential paths.
Keywords:- Multitenancy,Monitoring,Security,Privacy,Access
control,Virtualization.
I. INTRODUCTION
Cloud computing technology [1] has been increasingly
become a commonly Accepted Internet service delivery
Paradigm. Because, a variety of technological factors,
consists: Energy Efficiency enhancement, Hardware and
Software resource usage optimization, Elasticity,
Performance Isolation, versatility, On-demand Service
Schema[2]. in Addition with these technological advantages,
the Literature work demonstrated how many economic
advantages, including reduced capital and operating costs
(CAPEX and OPEX), are offered by the Cloud Computing
model. The number of companies embracing Cloud Solutions
along with customers using Cloud Services has been grown
exponentially for all these reasons, surpassing the ambitious
original expectations, sophistication of Cloud Systems. Cloud
Services are On-demand, Elastic and flexible, and a cloud
infrastructure therefore needs the following key Features:
flexibility, competitiveness, competitive load balancing,
application independence, protection and strength (as
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
P. Vijayakarthick
Department of Information Science and Engg
Sir M Visveswaraya Institute of Technology
Bangalore, Karnataka, India
described and evaluated in[3]). Innovative virtualization
methods, stable and Dynamic Scheduling Approaches,
Advanced Security procedures and processes for disaster
recovery are introduced and run in Cloud Computing
environments to support this functionality.
As per the Hardware Capacity and Traffic Volume, data
centres for Cloud storage continue to expand, thereby making
operation and maintenance of the cloud is very
muchComplex[149]. Accreted and Fine-grained control
practices are needed in this scenario to run these systems
successfully and to handle their growing complexities. There
are a significant number of studies in the literature that
suggest Surveys and Taxonomies of cloud computing [4-10]
and Virtualization Technologies [11,12]as well ascloud
security [13–19].
However, there wereno clearly defined reports on cloud
computing, facilities, and application management
frameworks, strategies, and resources. This is what we
describe as management of the cloud. We have presented in
this paper, we give a cloud management Survey, evaluating
complete concept in cloud computing. the research approach
shown in Fig.1 is applied according to the indications
mentioned in[126]. Which is listed below.
For the contextualization of the contributions we
include in this essay, we choose a very popular classification
of the concepts as well as functions in the area of
cloudcomputing. We use the work done by national institute
of standards and technology ( NIST) [1,20] for this reason.
We have a 2-Axis classification for Cloud surveillance after
reviewing the literatures in the field of cloud computing,
utilizing the conception provided by National Institute of
Standards and Technology: one axis is for the various reasons
for cloud computing surveillance (Section 3); Three
dimensions are extended further to the other axis: layers;
degree of abstractions; measurements and metrics (Section 4).
We review several research works to extract the key
properties of cloud audit systems, the problems correlate with
these Assets, as well as literature contributions on these
properties and concerns, thanks to the findings of the previous
phase (Section 5). In addition, a range of commercial and
open source frameworks and a range of cloud management
applications are reviewed, thus showing their association with
the previously mentioned properties and concerns (Section 6).
991
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
In the area of cloud surveillance, the previous measures
provides us with the input to extract the Open issue and
possible directions (Section 7). We think this paper presents
valuable insights to the scientific community, analyses the
literature, and sheds light on current and potential cloud
monitoring policy concerns.
II. CLOUD COMPTING
A short description as per the National Institute of
Standarads and Technology the concept of cloud computing
is as follows[1]: The following relevant terms were also
established by the NIST and Cloud community: 1.Critical
features, 2.Service Models, 3.Routing, 4.Application Models,
and 5.Roles [20]. The list of definitions in Table-1 since they
are beneficial and relevant for the subjects addressed in this
article. In view of the wide distribution of these principles in
the cloud computing literature.
To deepen these meanings and terms [1, 4to10, 21]. For
the purposes of brevity, considering the cloud service
provider as "Provider" and to a cloud service customer as
"User" if it is non-essential or the meaning is explicit about
the particular form of service concerned.
Fig -1: Research Methodology
Cloud Computing, from both economic and scientific
points ofview, has a variety of important elements driving for
its widespread growth.As with the former, Cloud promises
lower Overall cost of ownership (TCO), improved flexible in
terms of both services and service level agreements (SLAs)
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
with respect to other service hosting possibilities, and enables
staying on the core market, ignoring server management
problems. As for the above, Cloud Infrastructure promises
increased scalability, ubiquitous data and resource
connectivity, and innovative methods for disaster recovery.
and good features, cloud computing hasbeen a range of
problems in which a lot of money are spent in the research
community and industry: 1.scalability provision,2.Load
Balancing,3.Quality of Service (QoS),
reliability of operation and Application Performance; 4.study
of the underlying causes of results from end-to - end. Factual
and fine-grained testing and measuring methods and
platforms are needed to deal with such challenges.
III. CLOUD STORAGE: AUDIT
Cloud control is a duty of critical significance for
vendors and customers alike. In the other hand, it provides all
systems and implementations with information and Main
Success Metrics (KPIs). Continuous tracking of the cloud and
its Service Level Agreements offers information to both
providers and customers, such as the workload created by the
Cloud and the output and QoS provided by the Cloud, and
often enables measures to avoid or restore breaches (for both
providers and consumers) to be enforced. Tasks covered by
the position of the Cloud Auditor, monitoring is obviously
instrumental. Cloud Computing requires multiple processes in
more general words, for which control is an important
activity. We carefully review certain operations in this
section, the task of monitoring. Just in Fig. 2 In a taxonomy
of the key facets of cloud surveillance considered in this
article, certain operations are recorded.
3.1 Power and resource preparation
Since the wide scale implementation of cloud storage,
important activities for application and service creators has
always been infrastructure and capability preparation (e.g.
Network Servers [22,142]). Developers have to maintain the
consistency expected by software and services in order to
ensure(i) measure the power and resources to be bought (e.g.
CPU, memory , storage, etc.), based on the configuration and
execution of those software and facilities, and (ii) assess the
expected workload. However, while static analysis, checking
and tracking will produce an estimate, the real values are
unstable and highly volatile. As defined in SLAs, cloud
service providers typically provide assurances as per the
quality of service(QOS) and thus of capital and power for
their Services[23]. And they are in charge of preparing their
finances and capability so that they do not have to think about
service and device developers[24]. To this end, tracking is
important to anticipate and keep tracking of the progression
of all the criteria involved in the QoS assurance process[25]
for cloud service providers in order to better prepare their
Infrastructure and Resources for SLA compliance.
3.2 Administration of ability and resources Virtualization
has been a central feature of the introduction of Cloud
Computing over the years. Virtualization systems also
added another degree of difficulty for service suppliers,
who must handle both physical and virtualized services,
hiding the high volatility of physical infrastructure
992
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
services [25,27-29]. At any moment, virtualized resources IV. Properties
can move from one physical machine to another.  Scalabilities
Therefore, monitoring is important in cloud computing  Elasticity’s
scenarios (particularly in mobile scenarios[30]) to cope  Adaptabilities
with resource volatility[31] and rapidly evolving network  Timelines
conditions (which can lead to faults). QoS and QoP  Automaticity’s
(Quality of Protection) issues are becoming very  Comprehensivenes’s
important by using IaaS in the sense of public vital.  Extensibilities
Indeed, businesses and individuals require certain systems
 Intrusivenes’s
to have 100 percent uptime when implementing cloud
infrastructures. Therefore, in order to provide  Resilience
connectivity, durable and stable monitoring of the entire  Reliability
cloud infrastructure is required[32]. 3.3Management of  Availability
data centersCloud facilities are offered by large-scale  Accuracy
data centers, the operation of which is a very necessary
task. This practice is technically part of resource management
and we have recorded it here because of its relevance and its
In Cloud Monitoring the following issues need to be unique criteria. Two basic functions are included in data
addressed center management operations ( e.g. data center control):
1.tracking, which maintains tracking of requiredhardware’s
I. Need for monitoring and software’s measurements; and 2.data processing, which
1. The planning of capability and capital examines those measurements in order to determine resources
2. Management of Capacity and Capital provision, troubleshoot, or managementsbehavior from
3. Management Data Center device or programme states[33].Auditing and information
4.SLAs Managements processing activities could enable realtime activity and scales
5.Consumer bill management up to tens’s of thousands of heterogeneou’s node’s, grappling
6.Trouble shooting of diverse networkingtopology’s and input and output
7. Managing Efficiency architectures, with order to better handle those data centers.
8.Security Management As per this case, powerutilization is a significant driving force
of information strategic control of resource planning’s,
II.Open issues and prospective paths provisioning’s and managements.
1. Effectivity
2. Efficiencies 3.4 SLA Management Cloud Computing is unparalleled
3. New approaches and tools for tracking resource management simplicity callof innovative program
4. Monitoring of cross layers model’s within cloud storage systems can taken advantages of
5. Federated Clouds Tracking this new features[34], the basic principle of which is control.
6. Surveillance of the current network architecture based on In addition, reporting is mandatory’s and instrumental’s in
clouds certify compliance with the Service Level Agreements while
7. Workload creator for cloud scenarios auditing operations were carried out in order to comply with
8. Power and cost-effective control regulations[35] (e.g. where data or resources from the
9. Normal and Traditional Test Bed Activities government involve). At lost, auditing will allowscloud
storageproviders to devise maximum practical and responsive
III. Basic Concepts Service Level Agreements and best price model’s by
harnessing user-perceived performance knowledge[36].
Layers
 Facilities 3.5. Billing The "calculated services" provide is basic
 Networking fundamental aspects of cloud storage (see Tables 1 and
 Hardwares National Institute of Standards and Technology
definitions[1]), enabling user to pay proportionately through
 Operating Systems
various measurements and varying granularity for the use of
 Middlewares
the service, Examples of billing requirements for the business
 Applications models referred to in Section-2 were: Software as aService,
 Users The no. of Contemporary user/overall user-base, or
Application Specific output standards and Functions; for
Abstraction Levels Platform as aService systems, utilization of the Central
 Low Processing Unit or the completions times of the task;
 High Infrastructure as aService, the no. of Virtual Machine’s that
may vary other Central Processing Unit / memory unit
Tests and Metrics configurations [83,117] with a study of theoretical price
 Computation based model’s[130]. Monitoring is important for both of the
 Network based recorded price model’s and service’s model’s, from the

IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com 993

Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
Provider Side for Billing and from the customer with
checking its own use and for comparing Different Providers,
a Non-Trivial mechanism involving functionality and
resources to monitor[117]. The involvement of a cloud-
service-broker (See Sections-2,[20]) is a considerably more
complicated scenario: in this situation, automated
management is of vital significance for resource provisioning
and charge-back policies at the heart of the enterprise of the
cloud-broker[66]. 3.6. Troubleshooting The dynamic cloud
system provides a huge concern for troubleshoot(example
root-cause-analysis), Therefore, a robust, accurate and timely
reporting framework is necessary for Providers to Understand
with identify the issue within the complicated networks ,
customers to understands whether the supplier, networks
infrastructures/ application-itself is responsible for any
performance problem or failure[37].
3.7 Output control The repair of the hardware resources
entrusted to the suppliers, However, certain cloud nodes can
hit output order of magnitudesworsen-than others node’s,
considering the attention paid by Providers[38]. Suppose
customer chooses a Public Cloud to hosts a missions-criticals
services or for a science applications, there is an issue with
output inconsistency and usability. Therefore, with the user,
essential to track perceived success in order to respond to
improvements or to apply corrective steps. Monitoring is
therefore important, as it can greatly increase the efficiency of
existing applications[39] and have an effect on the
preparation of operations and the repeatability of tests.
3.8Security Monitoring For a variety of reasons, cloud
security is very important. Security’svery important and
relevant barriers with dissemination of Cloud Computing,
specifically with regard to some types of application
(exampleBusiness-Critical) & customers
(exampleGovernments.)[40.]. Reviews and guidelines for
Cloud protection have been published in numerous literature
works (see e.g.[40] and the sources therein, and[41,42]).
Proper management systems are needed for controlling the
protection of cloud infrastructures and services. In addition,
clouds have to comply with stringent laws and show it in
order to house essential facilities for public bodies. And this
can be achieved by a management scheme that makes
auditing (For example, to certify compliance with legislation
and responsibilities, such as maintaining user data within the
boundaries of a country)[35,43].
IV. CLOUD MONITORING
Cloud storage auditing is necessary to constantly
tracking and analyses infrastructures or
applicationsbehaviorsas per the efficiency, reliability’s,
energy use, capacity to reach Service Level Agreements,
protection, etc., as presented in Section 3[44], to conduct
business analytics, In order to enhance the functionality of
structures and application[45] and some other’spractices.we
present a variety of definitions which using to framework
remaining section’s with the cloud storage auditing, whereas
in Fig. 2 In a taxonomy that we recommend for core facets of
cloud management that we discuss in this article , we report
these principles.
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
4.1Layer’sas per the cloud storagesecurity’s alliance’s seven
layers shall be module’son a cloud: Facility’s, Network’s,
Hardwares, OSs, Middlewares, Applications, and the Users
[54,41,42]. With this layer’s may be managed by a cloud
service Provider or a cloud service customer, given the roles
specified in Section 2.
The following are detailed: Facility: the Physical
infrastructures including the informationcenters that house the
processing and network facilities are described in the facility.
Network: here it deals with the networks relations and routes
in this layer between the cloud and the end devices.
Hardware: here recognize physically parts of the device and
network devices. Operating System ( OS): the programme
modules that form the OS of cloud service provide and the
end user device. Middleware: Machine interface in-between
the Operating System& users programme is considered in this
interface. Usually, it is only present in the Software as
aService and Platform as aService offering cloud services.
Applications: The application run through operator with the
cloud storage model at this stage. Users: End users of cloud
storage infrastructure’s & programmes this executes in cloud
storage (example. Web based Browsers operating over a
hostsover userlocation) are regarded in this layer. These
layers can be used as where to position the monitoring
system's probes in the sense of cloud surveillance. In
particular, the layer where the samples were locateshas-been
a directly effect on-the phenomenon thoseshall be tracking&
observe. System-wide & guest-wide dimensions can be
described orthogonalthrough layer’s, as statesdu et.al.[141.]
sense of profilevictual’s machine, when describing what shall
be monitored within and what’s shall be monitor outside a
cloud environment. Along with,due to very high’s complexity
for cloud-storage services system, it’s difficult to be positive
either or not particular events are currently detected. E.g,
suppose bring a probes into an applications those operates to
cloud to gather information’s about @rate shares data as well
as others application operating over similar cloud, don’t
actually known if the transmission rate of the network often
includes this point. It depends on whether or not the two
programs operate similar physically hosts, and the provider
don’t expose to this data. Same problems occur in
determining computation performance:
4.2Abstraction’slevel: we shall provide maximum and
minimum level surveillance in Cloud Computing, and both
are needed [46]. Information on the state of the virtual
network is linked to high-level tracking. This information is
gathered through provider / customers from platform’s and
service’s execute by them or by 3rd partywithin middleware,
device & users layer. As per the issue of SaaS, user is normal
more knowledgeable in High-level tracking information than
the supplier (be close linked with Quality of service face
throughpredecessor). Low-level control, other way, is
connected to data gathered through vendor and typically not
accessible to the user, which much concern state of the whole
cloud 's physically resources ( example. server and
storingfacilities, etc.). Both levels are of concern to both
customers and suppliers in the IaaS sense. More
precisely[41], basic utilities gather information on the
Hardware layers (example in terms of Processor, Memory,
994
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020
Temperature) for low-level control.Executing device &
middleware’s layers (example error &programme
Vulnerabilities), @ networks layers ( e.g., firewall, IDS and
IPS protection of the whole infrastructure) and @ facilities
layers ( example physical protection of the facilities
concerned by video surveillance and verification mechanisms
monitoring of data centre rooms). Section 6 offers a
comprehensive review of many tools for max and min levels
surveillance (commercial and open source), Whereas the
commonly metric &test are described in the following.
4.3 Test and Metric The test for tracking shall be classified
into 2 major category’s: based on computer &based on
network[47.]. Based on Computer experiments are linked to
testing tasks aim at acquiring awareness of physical or
virtualized systems running cloud services and inferring their
status.
4.3.1The following metrics are related to computer-based
tests: Server performance, define as the no. of request per
seconds (exampleWeb Page Retrieval); Processor speed; CPU
time per execution, define as the Central Processing
UnitTime of a Single Execution; Central Processing Unit use,
define as each virtual machine's CPU occupation (useful to
control several VMs for the simultaneous usage of a Single
Machine); Memory pages transfer/seconds, define as the no.
of Memory pageeach seconds Exchanges per execution of the
memory page, define as the amount of Memory page use
durings executions disc / Memory throughputs message
transmission throughputs/delays b/w processes’ length of
particular predefine task Response time, Virtual Machine
initialization Time, Virtual Machine acquisitions / Release
Time, Execution / Access Time, uptime. They can all be
measured as per the classic statistic measures (Mean, Median,
etc.) along withTemporal classification &Stability/Variability
/ Predictability.
Based on Computer experiments are carried through the
supplier, or are often ordered by third parties. For eg, hyperic
Inc. publish the result of this tests over Cloud-Statuswithin
EC-2 and Google-App-Engine [48.].
4.3.2Networks-based Assessmentswere relates to networks-
layers metricstesting’s. this package consistsRound-Trip
Time (R-T-T), Jitter, Throughput, loss of Packet / Data,
bandwidth Available, power, amount of Traffic[49-52.].
Several laboratory literatures experiments contrasted legacy’s
web-hosting and cloudbased computing using these
metrics[53,142.].
4.4a notice On Clusters vs. Grids vs. Cloud
storageMonitoring Comparisons & duplication of
propertie’s between cloud storage and previously distributes
paradigm havingleads to a significant debate over concept
and unusual characteristics of Cloud
Computing[1,20,130,131,133]: as per the Monitoring
concept, we consider the variations here. Compared to the
particular to grid computing, the controlingof a cloud-storage
is much complicated due to the variations provided to the
customer in both the belief model and the perspective on
resources / services[131]. In particular, the primary purpose
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
of a Grid is to allocate resources across several organizations
[132], which means clearer accounting requirements and
minimal separation of resources, providing a clear
relationship between the parameters of management and the
state of physical resources. In other-way, the emergence of
numerous layer’s and application paradigm’s for the Cloud
(see Section 2) contributes to strong resource abstraction,
leading to a more opaque interaction between the observables
relevant to the layer or services and the underlying resources.
In addition, take a note even-though the Abstract-Interfaces
provided to a customer will obviously requires a reducing
monitor requirement with regard to grid-in Cloud Computing,
In a high complexity& heterogeneouss scenarios, this has to
do with promised or anticipated results and with resource
management. When introducing a control s/m comes through
the grid computing sector for a Server, this void in priorities
and clarity needs to be addressed. Finally, the "on demand"
service model presents extra challenge’s to control
mechanisms not configured for rapid churning of both
customers and services, as discussed in previous pages. For
cloud applications, most of the management methods and
platforms suggested for the case of Grid[59,60,91-93] have
been tailored. zanikolas et.al.[94.] survey work done the
research area of Grid Monitoring by presenting the principles,
criteria, stages, and associated standardisation practises
involved (e.g. the Grid Monitoring Framework of the Global
Grid Forum). In addition, they suggested a taxonomy,
constructed by considering distance, scalability, In the next
section, the challenges and the suggested solutions about the
implementation of systems planned for steadily evolving
fixed infrastructure in the Cloud scenario are addressed in
detail. In ganglia.[59], Nagios.[60], MonaLisa.[91], R-
GMA.[92] and GridICE.[93] and related cloud monitoring
schemes, these considerations should be taken. By applying
the Cloud model to Cluster computing.[133], all these
variations are much more emphasised. In this situation, the
comparatively static design, restricted service interaction
possibilities and low resource provisioning complexity render
Clusters comparable to Cloud IaaS Providers' base
technologies, which contribute to management criteria that
are a small subset of Cloud requirements.
V. CLOUD. MONITORING.:PROPERTIE’S &
RELATING PROBLEMS
Distributed Monitoring System is expected to has many
propertie’s that add new problems seen overcloud computing
scenarios in-order to work properly. We describe and
empower certain properties in this section, examine the
problems that result from them, and explore how these issues
have been discussed in literature. In taxonomy of the key
facets of cloud monitoring discussed in this article, we report
these properties. We explain the analysis problems involved
with each of the considered properties. This image
demonstrates that 1.Research Issues to be discussed in a
diverse and heterogeneou’s range, comprise multi-
disciplinary researching area, and 2.SomeIssues are linked to
more-than One domain, as will be clearer in the following,
995
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
5.1 Scalability:In Cloud Computing contexts, such a property
is very important because of the wide No. of parameter’s to
be controlled over a vast range of resource’s. Introduction of
virtualization technologies that allow for the allocation of
multiple Virtual Resources on-top of a Single Physical
Resource amplifies this significance. The measurement’s
needed to achieve a holistic view of the Cloud statuss leads to
a Very Large amount of information from numerous remote
locations’ being produced. A robust management device
should therefore be capable of storing, transmitting and
processing such data volumes effectively without impairing
regular cloud operations. Such a problem has mostly been
discussed in literature frameworks within monitor after
aggregation and filtering to the control framework in-order to
minimise those volumes: aggregations blends numerous
metric’s in-to a synthetics one-that is assumed or not
explicitly tracked filtering eliminates the transmission of
useless information the control programme. All propose
architectures implement a sub-system to relay event-
announcements [23,25,33,56], irrespective of the particular
min level or max level tracked parameter’s, or focus on
agents response for Data processing, filterings and
aggregations [23,25,57]. combine metric’s from various
layer’s (hardwares , Software, programme & users) & apply
kalman-filters[58.] to obtain expected parameters; Linear
Combination of Software-layers metric[56.]. By
implementing additional optimizations, some architectures
further increase scalability: powerful agent distribution and
interconnection algorithms[57]content based routing(C-B-R)
&complex event processing(C-E-P) facilitie’s[37.]. Data
source-close light-weight analysis’s, adjustable sorting, Time-
based filterings, and ad-hoc compilation &aggregations
techniques applies to separate control system partition’s[44].
5.2Elasticitys If the monitoredhostshall cooperate for
complex shifts of the monitoring individuals, the monitoring
system is elastic, soVirtual resource’s generated & lost by
expansion’s&contractionswere correctly monitored.[55.]. this
is also known as dynamisms [23], Cloud Computing allows
its tools to be versatile, it is different to the static-system
existence with the predecessor compute paradigms
(example:grid-computing), thereby creatingelasticity’s an
integral property’swithits management framework, as 3 main
driving forces: differing distribution of services to user’s,
differing control criteria for the system, and variable
involvement of user’s (Multi-tenant scenario’s). Difficulty in
delivering elasticity’s is connected for the factual a recent
basiccharacteristic implemented by Cloud management and
not traditionally regarded as a prerequisite for management
standardizeddistributes networks. Thus, a dynamically
evolving hybrid technology is not believed or endorsed and is
not appropriate for deployment in cloud storage scenario’s.
Variety of extension’s to conventional management schemes
have-been mentioned in the literature to overcome this
problem. Basically, they introduced support for virtualized
resource monitoring, mostly using a Publish-Subscribe model
to de-couple contact end’s & promote dynamisms. In-order to
Deal with the relocation of Virtual resource’s, the
hypervisor’scontroller’s is accountable for controlling the
existence of Virtual Execution Environments (V-E-Es) on the
Lattice[55] network by periodically receiving a list of
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
operating V-E-Es from the hypervisors. The RESTful Case
Brokering module is given with an analogous extension to
Nagios[25], This enables all physical and virtual networks to
be monitored; elasticity’s is accomplished by leveraging the
designs trends of a Conventional Service-Oriented
Architecture to understand a double Push-Pull models:
knowledge control is push to the managements layers by
agents and data users may Pull input from it . Whenever the
cloud is taken into consideration in the configuration of the
monitoredhost, more difficult solutions are possible. Other
capabilities include the detection of the tracked services at
runtime and the initialization monitored agent at runtime.
Those characteristics are get through an election-based
hierarchy of brokers gathering, manipulating and distributing
monitored data the layout of network correspondence & the
nature of computation’s were dynamic changed as per the
state of the resources monitoring.
5.3 Adaptability A control system should be modified to
adapt to various computing and network loads such that it is
not invasives (i.e. impeded by other activitie’s)[55.]. Because
of the sophistication and dynamic state of cloud situations,
adaptability is necessary for the monitoring system to prevent
the negative effect of monitoredactivities’ on normallycloud
operation’s to the greatest degree practicable, in particular
while active measures are involved. Indeed, the workloads
generates by Active measurement, along the compilation,
process involves the resources of computation and
communication and hence constitutes an expense to the
infrastructure of the Cloud. Therefore, to achieve Cloud
maintenance objectives, the opportunity to fine-tune the
monitored operation’s as per the relevant policies is of critical
significance. It's not easy to have adaptability, Since it has to
adapt rapidly to shifts in load, ensuring the proper Trade-off
b/w accuracy (e.g. consistent latencie’s) & invasiveness.
Literatures, multiple studies [31,25,57,44,33] have discussed
this problem by the tuning of the sum of services monitored
and the pace of monitoring. For example, park et.al.[31.]
proposed an approaches to evaluate and predict resource
states based on Markov Chains, in-order to adaptive Set an
acceptable Time period to transfer data for tracking. Tracking
is important for actions relating to a customer's or a provider
's key interests, but failure to collect the required information
in time for an effective response ( e.g. raising an alarm,
supplying additional support, migrating facilities, introducing
a new policy) will negate the utility of tracking itself.
Consequently, grant it requires the similar problem’s or
Trade-off with competing conditions. The Time b/w the
detection of an incident & receipt shall be broke down into
multiple contributions in more detail: measurement, analysiss
and Delay in communication. They each face certain
problems. The short the samplings time, the greater the Delay
b/w the detection and recording of a controlled event. A
Trade-off b/w precision and sampledfrequency’s is also
required to achieve up-to - date information, taking into
account resource limitations as well. Finally, the
transmission delay may be substantial since the information
can have to pass over several connexions to meet processing
nodes, since the Cloud is a distributed infrastructure, and this
delay is much more important when analysing dynamic
activities including remote source information. The Time to
996
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
Insight metric was described as "the latency between the
selection of one monitoring sample (indicating interest event)
on each node and the completion of the analysis on all those
monitoring samples" in order to determine the timeliness.
This method is also used to compare various topologies of
connectivity and measurement and the trade-offs with the
corresponding costs of infrastructure.
5.5. Automaticity autonomous monitored s/m is capable of
self-managing its dispersed resource’s by adapting to
unexpected change’s automatically, while covering providers
and consumers' inherent complexity[62]. Because Cloud
infrastructure’swere designed to providesOn-demand Self-
Service &Rapid Elasticity when constantly running with
limited services interruption’s, its extreme necessary to be
Able to responds to detected change’s by the monitoring
system, Faults and loss of efficiency, without manual
interference. It is not trivial to promote autonomy in such a
monitoring system, as it requires the integration of a control-
loop which received input’s from a large no. of sensor’s and
propagate’s controlsbehavior to a large no. of distributes
actuator’s. This means Elasticity and Timeliness, in part. In
addition, the analysis capability for understanding of the
situation must be applied (the sophistication and layer of the
cloud architecture pose challenges to this) and it is important
to identify acceptable policy to drives the actions of the
control system in reaction to the observed incidents. Several
studies[62-65,55,33] have discussed those problems in
literature and extended them to various kinds of cases. These
methodologies are guided by criteria for optimum response
time and have seen to be useful for delivering SLAs. Using a
system able to relate min-level resources metric services are
controlled.
5.6. Comprehensivene, Extensibilitys & be started. Finally, they find that co-locating two programmes
IntrusivenesProviding a robust tracking system is useful. The
benefit of the former is that a single tracking API can be
implemented, regardless of what kind of tracking information
is currently used. For the latter, the gain being the
introduction and management of just a single control
infrastructure. By giving extensibility as well, The protection
of low intrusiveness helps the expense of instrumentation to
be reduced. Cloud Computing is a comparatively recent
paradigm, and implemented applications have not generally
adopted some universal principles. Many non-cloud-specific
management mechanisms have already been developed to
have extensibility and low intrusiveness, and those
capabilities have been preserved through their expansion to
cloud scenarios [59,60,26,66]. When contemplating
comprehensiveness, several difficulties emerge. The first
problem relates to the fact that various structural
architectures, technology , and services have to be served by a
comprehensive control scheme, while ensuring separation
between different tenants. In the other hand, owing to the
inherent dynamism of Cloud environment’s & the vast no.
and complexity of tools and criteria viewed at various stages,
a robust management scheme allows for improved output of
troubleshooting operations, which poses another problem. For
the first time, the maintenance of separation was discussed.
As per the tenants exposures, it maintains separation by
directsinformation’s tracking flow’s across the similar
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
streams managements systems, Which reveals the datafor
intend recipient’s. Along with , in-order to allows the
functionally block’s to be interoperable, This are related to
adapters that collect data from particular technologies. With
respect to supports for heterogeneoussVirtualized systems,
the control subsystem vmDriver[71.] to interceptions of
event’s occurres at the Virtual Machine level has been
introduced. This enables the status of Virtual Machines that
mask guest OS discrepancies to be tracked. On the challenges
involved in troubleshooting vast quantities of complex and
heterogeneous elements, In order to explain the causesfor
output found in clouds environment’s, multiple experiments
were carried out. The source of the output observed for
science applications could not be established by Hill and
Humphrey [67], even though the data centre network is barely
used, and established the processor sharing system as the
primary responsible one. Schad et al.[39] considered the
output observed to be substantially variable with time and
VM instances at various levels (application and OS),
Predictability and repeatability of wall-clock timed tests thus
influence data-intensive applications. Mei et al.[47], based on
a small testbed, focused on the effect of co-locating apps in a
virtualized cloud in terms of efficiency of capacity and
resource sharing. They found that other VMs result in less
regular scheduling with less time in the presence of idle
instances, which is mostly due to two factors: I running an
idle guest domain timer tick and an overhead background
switch, and (ii) receiving network packets, such as address
resolution protocol (ARP) packets, requiring guest domain I /
O receiving. They also noted that the time of performance
loss encountered due to the development of new VMs on
demand is generally limited to 100 s, and is related to the
ability of the system, the amount of workload in the operating
domain, And the number of new instances of VM that need to
on VMs hosted on the same physical computer causes
performance degradation when Processor-intensive activities
are involved and, when several guest domains are operating,
context changes between them result in more frequent missed
cache and translation lookaside buffer (TLB), resulting in
more time consumption of the Processor serving the same
information.
5.7 Resilience’s, Reliability &Availability ,a monitored s/m
is resilience whenever the persistence’s of the deliveries of
services can be justifiable trust in the face of changes[69],
which essentially means resisting a no. of components
failure’s when continuingly to function normality itsReliable
whenever its shall performs the desired functions for a
specifiedcertain of times under specified conditions;
itsAvailable Because monitoring is useful for sensitive cloud
operations, so that billings, verification of Service Level
Agreements compliances& control of resources (see Section
3), in order not to undermine those operations, the monitoring
mechanism must be resilient, accurate and accessible.
Monitoring system& resources shall switch from one
Physical device to other with the heavy use of virtualization
technology by cloud providers, invalidating classic
monitoredlogic’s and mine the reliabilities of monitoring
Therefore, there are many challenges with the requirement to
include these services for cloud monitoring, such as tracking
997
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
and handling heterogeneous monitor and reporting services,
characterizing and defending against potential vulnerabilities
of the monitoring system itself. Several academic papers have
considered numerous facets of durability. Some
studies[30,31] discussed the sensitivity of mobile cloud
storage environments to faults. Where mobile devices are
regarded as a highly dynamic platform, which now have
substantial computing capacity and storage space, and such
uncertainty affects the choice of the monitoring frequency.
Romano et al.[37] suggested a QoS-suitable cloud monitoring
tool , called QoS-MONaaS, which stands for "Quality of
Service MONitoring as a Service", which is deliberately
configured to be accurate and provides "as a Service"
monitoring facilities, enabling its user (provider or consumer)
to define the primary performance indicators (KPIs) of
concern in a structured SLA and When a SLA violation is
observed, the alarms will be lifted.
5.8. Accuracy Because the measurements it produces are
reliable, that is, those were closely to the accurate value has
been measure; we consider a measurement device to be
reliable. For any distributed tracking system, consistency is
critical because it can have a significant effect on the
activities’. For example, when the tracking device is using for
thetroubleshoot; calculation in-accuracy can leads to in-
correct detection of the problems source. Accuracy is
becoming much more relevant in the sense of cloud
computing. First, Cloud platforms with predefined service
level agreements and in the event of SLA breaches, vendors
must pay fines to their consumers. Inaccurate tracking will
result in the loss of revenue. Secondly, as a management
device used for critical cloud operations (see Section 3),
detailed monitoring is crucial in order to conduct them
successfully and efficiently. In Cloud Computing scenarios,
the review of the literature indicates two key concerns related
to the performance of tracking systems. The first is attributed
to the workload used to execute the measurements:
Reasonable stress needs to be implemented in order to track
the Cloud, especially when using active monitoring
approaches. The second dilemma involves the methods of
virtualization used in the Cloud: Errors due to virtualization
technologies that incorporate extra layers between
applications and physical resources ( e.g. time-related
measurements are affected by the exchange of physical
resources such as CPUs, device keys, and buffers) can
influence the measurements performed. With respect to these
two topics, many references have been given in literature. As
for the workload, the characterization of actual workloads
requires research efforts in this area, The replication in the
Cloud of those workloads, which experiments to run and
how, which calculation criteria, etc. In order to understand
their performance, a variety of study groups conducted
experimental campaigns on various clouds, both in general
and for particular applications. In order to learn whether and
how they would help science and high-performance
applications, many studies [62,72,75,76,67,77-79] analysed
the performance of particular clouds. Many of these works
can be found on the [62,72,75,76,67] application layer since
they are operating in the Cloud using custom software. A user
layer review was also conducted by Ostermann et al.[72],
although a few others have used other types of test beds,
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
usually situated on the researchers' premises[75,67]. In the
other hand, the probability of using Cloud to support
database[80,39] and service-oriented[81,82,56] applications
has been explored in various works in literature. These
experiments are usually done on the programme [81,39] or on
the software layer [81,80,39]. CPU speed [81,39], disc
throughput [81,39], VM initialization time [39], network
throughput, jitter and loss [39], memory throughput [39],
server throughput [80], and money cost [80] are the metrics
considered in these works. These tests have been performed
on a number of commercial clouds, including Amazon
EC2[81,80,39], Google App Engine[80], Microsoft
Azure[80] and local test beds[39]. Finally, Binnig et al.[83]
demonstrated a range of benchmark shortcomings used by
many of the works previously cited. They say, in particular,
factors such as scalability, The challenge is to provide correct
time stamping at the measuring nodes with respect to the
latency, jitter, power and usable bandwidth. A timely
scheduling and switching mechanism between the various
VMs includes the introduction of VMs at the end nodes. As a
result , it is possible to queue packets belonging to a single
VM until the physical device flips back to that VM. Which
results in incorrect time stamping[87]. Some works[88,89]
have stated that reliable RTT calculations can only be done
under low network and computational loads, and that most
delays are added (as opposed to receiving packets) when
sending packets. They conclude that under heavy network
load, kernel-space timestamps are not adequately reliable, and
access to timestamps as provided by physical network
interfaces will be necessary to solve this problem[89].
Property’s of System’s for clouds monitor & relates
research-issues
1. Scalability.
 Aggregation of measures
 Filtering of measures
2. Elasticity
 Decoupling of communicating ends
 Tackling of migrating issues
3. Resilience, Reliability and fault tolerance
 Fault protection
 Tackling of migrating issues
4. Adaptability
 Tuning amount of resources monitored
 Tuning the sampling interval
5. Timeliness
 Processing large amount of data
 Tuning the sampling interval
6. Automaticity
 Situation awareness
 Control loop
7. Comprehensiveness, Extensibility and Intrusiveness
 Heterogeneity of resources monitored
 Troubleshooting
 Isolation
8. Accuracy
 Workload used in active measurements
 Measurement in virtualized environment
998
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
VI. CLOUDS MONITORING.:PLATFORM’S & watch[137.] among them, which-tracks & aggregate’s key-
SERVICE’S performances indicators through the follow Azure-resource’s:
instance’s, database’s, federation’s of database’s, storages,
We look at the best widespread commercials and Open- website’s and webs application’s. It also support’s users-
source clouds monitoring. tools & service’s assist customers in defined output counter’s connected to measurements of
evaluating the efficiency and usability of cloud services (see quantifiables applications. It specifically tackles Scalability,
Table 2). We define all cloud management systems Adaptability, Autonomicity, and Extensibility, according to
comprising a module primarily aimed at monitoring and the information available on the website.
systems for which cloud monitoring is the primary objective.
6.1.3-Cloudkick-Rackspace Via Clouds Site’s, it provide it is
6.1.COMMERCIALs PLATFORM’S According to the user’s with-tracking information such as CPU use and volume
concepts reported in Section 4, both high- and low-level of traffic. Furthermore, RackSpace offers applications, called
surveillance is carried out by commercial platforms. Cloud resources, capable of developing a full management
solution with a special emphasis on virtual machines and
6.1.1 Cloud-watch Amazonsdon’t offer data on the min-level warning mechanisms. Cloud-Kick[96.], a Multi-cloud
surveillance systems uses, in accordance with other managements platforms with a wide-variety of amongmax-
commercial suppliers, and the way monitoredinformation is &min-level tracking capabilities and measurements, & the
captured, collects& processed is confidentially. amazon gives potential to create custom-plugins, has recently been acquired
customers a service called CloudWatch at an advanced level. by RackSpace. Its-possible to imagine information tracking in
CloudWatch is capable of tracking systems such as EC2, real time and to customise alarm mechanisms to notify user’s
where the information gathered is primarily connected to in real-time.
virtual networks.
6.1.4-Cloud-status One of the first-independent cloud-storage
Table2: Cloud. Monitoring.Platform’s &Service’s monitorg service’s supporting Amazons Web-service’s &
Commercials Opens-Source Service’s Google-app Engines is CloudStatus[48], build over hyperic-
Platform’s Platform’s hq. It offers user device performances reporting, a framework
for determining the root-cause analysis’s of performances
improvements & degradation’s, and monitoring measures for
withReal-time &weekly’s patterns.
Cloudseluth[112.] 6.1.5-Nim-soft Nim-soft Management solution.(NMS.)[97.]
Cloud-watch[95.] Nagios.[104.] Cloud- will monitored both Private &Public cloud data centres. It
Azure-watch[137.] Opennebula[105.] harmony[115.] offers a centralised view through a "consolidated monitoring
Cloudkick.[96.] CloudPackzenpack Cloud-stone[114.] dashboard" of IT-infrastructure’s & resources offered by
Cloudstatus.[48.] [108.] CloudCMP[116.] Google-Application’s, Rack-space-cloud, Amazon-, Sales-
Nimsoft.[97.] PCMONS[101] Cloudclimate[118.] force.com & others. It has been used to track SLAs[98] and
Monitis.[99.] DARGOS[128] Cloudyn.[119.] provides the key features of Scalability and
Logicmonitor.[100.] Hyperic-HQ[128.] Up-time.[120.] Comprehensiveness.
Aneka.[101.] Sensu[139] Cloud-floor[121.]
Groundwork.[129.] Nimbus[110] Cloud- 6.1.6-Monitis In order to warn users about service efficiency
cruiser[122.] and to submit warnings when resources are deemed limited,
Monitis.[99.] adopt’s agent’s built over resource’s to be
CloudWatch collects several forms of data from tracking tracked. Its largely focuse on Amazon-services & offers an
and retains them for two weeks. Users can build graphs, open-API to expand and configure the platform, based on the
statistics, metrics, temporal behaviours, thresholds, alerts, etc. HTTP-REST-protocol. Comprehensiveness is the principal
on these data. Relevant behaviour such as event warning, via attribute.
the Amazon SNS app, or Autoscaling[95] may be activated by
alarms. This monitoring service's billing is handled 6.1.7-LogicMonitor Logicmonitor.[100.] allow to monitoring
independently and it is independent of the services tracked. virtualize infrastructure’s by adopt an elasticsMulti-layer
Amazon has also modified the tracking service 's billing Approach. Its automatically-discovers & tracks new adding or
policies, making it free of charge for standard features and a removed services given, by correctly grouping-them &
five-minute sampling limit, and charging for specialised submitting relevant alerts, allowing output correlation and
features and a one-minute sampling rate[46]. CloudWatch problem solving. It includes the key characteristics of
focuses primarily on timeliness, extendability, and elasticity, Scalability, Elasticity, and Comprehensiveness.
while cross-layer monitoring results in limited results (see
Section 7). 6.1.8-Aneka Aneka [101,66,102] is a platform for cloud
application creation, implementation , and management. In
6.1.2-Azure-watch While the Window’s-Azure Software addition to heterogeneous computing tools, Aneka comprises
Development Kit provides developer’s with a basic softwares of a flexible Cloud middleware and an extensible set of
librarys for tracking they’re programmes, it has built several services, managing programme delivery, tracking the state of
3rd -party monitor service’s surround it.Considered Azure- the Cloud, and providing connectivity with existing Cloud

IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com 999

Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
technologies. For the creation of distributed software, the
introduction of new capabilities into the cloud, and the support
of multiple types of clouds, aneka offers an extensible API:
Public, Private and Hybrid. Aneka applies a Service-Oriented
Architecture(S-O-A), & the basic elements of the Aneka-
Cloud are utilities. The architecture encompasses basic
resources for infrastructures & nodes maintenance,
deployment of software, accounting, and control of processes.
The middleware represents Aneka Clouds' distributed
infrastructure which offers a range of cloud interaction
resources, including monitor, executions, managements, & all-
the-other functionality introduced in the system. It is monitor
feature focuse’s primarily on scalability’s and elasticity’s.
6.1.9-Ground-work Ground-work.[129.] will track any type
of computer/virtual object in a informationcenter, from
server’s to surveillance systems. Through it is open-
architecture, new-devices were simple to instal using plugin’s
and connector’s & due-to-the-use of Nagio’s, it will
incorporate the thousand’s of present Nagio’s plugins for
increased monitor scope. With respect to Server and
Virtualization Monitoring, GroundWork tracks virtualized or
physical infrastructure and software in the Server or on the
premises of customers. GroundWork helps virtualization
vendors such as VM-ware & clouds vendors such as amazon:
its easier-to-get standard measurements, check service levels,
and follow a multivendor approach for cost savings by using
monitoring from someone other than the supplier. It relies
more on comprehensivenes.
6.2- Platforms-Open-Source
6.2.1-Nagios-Nagios.[104.] is popular open-source monitor
framework in the business class, which has been expanded to
enable cloud infrastructure monitoring. Monitoring capacities
for both Virtual instance’s & storages facilitie’s have been
extended[46]. Thanks to these extension’s, Eucalyptu’s [103.],
a popular Cloud-Computing open-source framework,
compatible with both EC-2 and S3-Amazon systems, has been
adopted for monitoring. It is also used to monitor Open-
stack[107], an IaaS open source storage framework (Ubuntu
has implemented it as a standard private cloud solution after
11.10) consisting of three major projects: Compute, Object
Database, and Image Service.
6.2.2-Open-nebula-OpenNebula[105-106] is-an-open-source-
tool-kit to handle public-private-hybrid clouds infrastructure’s
that are distributed and heterogeneous. It tracks cloud physical
infrastructure’s-through a modulesknown asinformation--
manager and provides Cloud Providers with information.
Monitor data is obtained via node-installed probes, queried via
SSH connections, and connected to information about the state
of physical nodes. It offers the core characteristics of
Scalability and Adaptability.
6.2.3-CloudStack-zenPack-Cloud-Stack[108.] is a Java-
written open-source programme designed to instal and operate
massive virtual machine networks as a highly-accessible and
scalables cloud-platform. Currently, it-supports-the-most
common hypervisor’s and provides three methods of handling
Cloud-Storage environment’s: an easytouse web-interface, a
command-line tools, & full featured REST.ful api. A Zenos
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
extensions named Zen-pack[109.] shall be used to control
Cloud-stack Virtual & physical-device’s. It handles all alerts
and events, and provides memory, Processor, and storage, as
well as network specific parameter’s Timeliness is the main
feature provided by CloudStack ZenPack.
6.2.4 Nimbus-The Nimbus.[110.] framework is an
interconnected collection of tool’s (instantiations of
programmes, initialization, testing , maintenance, etc.) for
deploying Scientific User Infrastructure Clouds that enable the
combination-of-Open-Stack, amazon, & other cloud’s. It is
infrastructures is an open-source I-a-a-S implementations
compliant with EC2 / S3, directly targeting scientific
community features of interest, such as proxy certificate
support, batch scheduler’s, best effort allocation’s, etc. as for
tracking, Cloud apps are deployed, configured and monitored
by a series of tools and APIs, the most-important-of-which-are
context-Broker & Cloud-init d. Following a "pull" model, the
Background Broker facilitates the automated and repeatable
synchronisation of large Virtual-cluster launche’s. A-launch
will consists of several VM’s and can cover several provider’s
of IaaS, include commercials& academics spaces offerings.
6.2.5-PCMONS-The private cloud Management
system.[111.] consists of seven-module’s as follows: node-
knowledge gatherer. Itsaccountable for collecting &local node
informations (e.g. VM-information) & sends it to-the-cluster
data-integrator. Integrator for cluster-data. Its accountable for
arranging the cluster node’s and gathering data-for-the-other
module’s through an agent. Data-Integrator monitoring. It is
responsible for data collection and storage in a database and
provides the Configuration Generator with information. Track
VM. This retrieves data from the database and creates
configuration files for other resources ( for example, tracking
data visualisation). Database for tracking software. It is
responsible for obtaining and upgrading the database to track
data from various resources. The present edition adopts the
style of Nagios. Interface to Consumer. The new edition uses
interfaces from Nagios.
PRIVATE-CLOUD-MONITORING-SYSTEM-
ARCHITECTURE
VIEW-LAYER
Nagios---Business-Manager—Network-Administrator
INTEGRATION-LAYER
Cluster Data ------Node-Information-gatherer-----
Configuration-
Integrator Generator
INFRASTRUCTURE-LAYER
Xen----OpenNebula.org-------Eucalyptus
Fig-4 PCMONS Architecture
6.2.6-DARGOS DARGOS.[128.] is a collaborative
framework for clouds monitor using-a-hybrid push-pull
approachs to disseminates information about resources
monitor. D-ARGOS gives assessments of the cloud's
physicals&victuals properties while retaining a low-overhead.
Furthermore, it-has-been design to be scalable and readily
expandable with new metrics. The-DARGOS-architecture
1000
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
consists of two-main-component’s: Node-Management Agent-
(N-M-A): NMA’s wereaccountable for gathering and
distributing resource utilisation statistics (CPU , Memory,
Hypervisor ...) to a given node. A certain region in the cloud is
correlated with a NMA. It is also built in nodes that-are-the-
Cloud's resource-pool. Node-Supervisor -Agent(N-S-A): The
NSA subscribes to the release of tracking information by the
NMA. It stores the obtained resource data locally. NSAs can
simultaneously monitor multiple zones (specified by regex).
Extensibility, adaptability, and intrusiveness are primarily
addressed by DARGOS.
6.2.7-Hyperic-HQ-Hyperic.hQ[138.] is the CloudStatus
platform's open source centre, enabling the maintenance and
control of the performance of cloud infrastructures, covering
both virtual and physical tools. Every framework, include
unix, Debian, Window’s, Solari’s, A-I-X, H-P-U-X, VM-ware
&amazon Web-Services, supports the Java-based agents. In
addition , it offers comprehensive monitoring and review of
essential data evaluating service levels of IT and web
activities, quality of resource use, exception-reports and
operating strategy. It focuse’s primarily on scalabilitys&
comprehensivenes.
6.2.8-Sensu-Sensu[139] is based-on-Rabbit-MQ, a Message-
Oriented Middleware that provides a-monitoring-server,
platform—independent--agents & a web—based-dashboard,
and is intended to transcend the limitations of conventional
monitoring systems in cloud environments. It leverage’s the
Advanced-Message-Queing-Protocol(A-M-Q-P) & content website and to be similarly deployable on multiple
implement’s a REST--based J-S-O-N A-P-I for data recovery
for scalable processing and safe communication. The platform
focuses specifically on extendability and elasticity.
6.3-Service’s to assess clouds performances&
dependability’s
6.3.1-Cloud-Sleuth-Cloud-sleuth[112.] is a webbased Clouds
performances visualizations tools. It is main-objective is the
analysiss of a noteble no. of-public I-a-a-S & P-a-a-S
Provider’s by monitor two-user-layer propertie’s:
Reliabilitys& Timelines’s. the tests is done accessing through
geographicallys A basic programme installed on the controlled
clouds is a distributed location (Gomez Performance
Network). The implementation of this application has two key
objectives: to imitate a dynamic-content website and to be
similarly deployable on multiple forms of I-a-a-S or P-a-a-S.
Over various time periods, the experienced output is mapped,
demonstrating the progression of the Cloud reaction times
over time.
6.3.2-CloudHarmony-CloudHarmony[113.] offers a wide
variety of public cloud efficiency benchmarks. Finally , large-
time cloud uptime monitoring is conducted across a globally
dispersed network capable of testing connectivity in multiple
ways, with ping and TCP port checks being the basic ones.
Comprehensiveness and timeliness are primarily provided by
such a service.
6.3.3-Cloudstone-Cloudstone[114-115] is a project by UC
Berkeley aimed at offering a benchmark for reproducible and
equitable cloud efficiency measurement. Many of its modules
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
are open-source and are selected to incorporate a Web 2.0
application model of practical use. To be deployed on an IaaS,
and to be tested with Faban, a Markov-chain-based workload
generator, an entire application is given. Deployment, testing
and results report management tools are also available. The
average efficiency index considered is a noteworthy
characteristic: "dollars per user per month", i.e. the expense of
servicing a certain number of users with a given QoS
(expressed in terms of percentile of requests served below a
given time threshold). Accuracy and availability are
predominantly the focus of the project. 6.3.4. 4.4. Cloud CMP
Cloud CMP[116,117] is a method developed by Duke
University and Microsoft Research to compare various Cloud
Providers' cost-effectiveness. This is achieved by thoroughly
analysing the efficiency of a common core range of facilities
provided, including device instances, storage, cloud-to-user
networks and intra-cloud networks. A variety of metrics are
measured for each service. The benchmark suite is open to the
public and consists of a web server to be installed on a cloud
case, commanded by customers to perform the benchmark
tasks demanded and report performance. Accuracy and
affordability are primarily handled by the instrument.
6.3.5. CloudClimate CloudClimate[118] is a platform that
shows surveillance test graphs running on various clouds
(from different suppliers and locations). A basic application
installed on the monitored clouds is Monitored Clouds Spread
Places (Gomez Efficiency Network). The implementation of
this application has two key objectives: to imitate a dynamic
forms of IaaS or PaaS. Over various time periods, the
experienced output is mapped, demonstrating the progression
of the Cloud reaction times over time.
6.4-Current-overall-picture-of-Cloud-monitoring-
solution’s
As highlighted above, there are a wide variety of public
and private cloud platform monitoring solutions with different
assets, each focused primarily on a subset of the features
mentioned in Section 5. We stress how most commercial or
open source applications for cloud monitoring (see Tables 3
and 4) do not specifically consider or advertise such
characteristics, including Intrusiveness, Resilience, Reliability
, Availability and Accuracy. Most notably, when relating to
the monitored cloud instead of the tracking network, this
collection of apparently marginal properties are clearly
measured by most of the utilities that measure the performance
and efficiency of the cloud (see Table 5). This illustrates that
widely regarded assets for cloud services are not actually
central to any of the cloud monitoring systems analysed on
their own. We also note how many problems (see Section 7)
are not yet deemed critical by the sites and facilities deemed
and anticipate space in this direction for future study. The
above-mentioned systems and resources allow the compilation
of a variety of different types of metrics. The type and number
of such metrics can also be very high, and new ones may also
be identified by most platforms and services. It is beyond the
scope of this paper to explain all the metrics for all the
programmes, both because of the amount of detail needed for
this description and the space required. As an example,
CloudKick by RackSpace[96] enables a very large number of
1001
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
metrics to be obtained from the tracked hosts within (through
agents) and outside (called remote check). The metric form
extends from the CPU and memory to the disc and network.
There are a variety of measurements that can be obtained for
each form ( e.g., the exact amount of usable and used memory
is available for memory use, the swap pages in and out, the
total memory available and used, etc., plus user-defined ones).
VII. CLOUD-MONITORING: OPEN-ISSUES &
FUTURE-DIRECTONS
Cloud computing is really difficult. This uncertainty
translates into more management and tracking activity needed.
Compared to conventional service hosting infrastructures, the
higher scalability and greater scale of clouds require more
dynamic monitoring systems, which hence need to be more
flexible, stable and fast. These programmes must be capable of
handling and checking a vast number of resources and must do
so easily and effectively. To ensure prompt measures such as
the allocation of new money, this must be done by brief
measuring periods and fast alert systems, able to easily detect
and monitor performance impairments or other problems.
Therefore, in large-scale and extremely complex settings
such as clouds, monitoring mechanisms must be refined and
tailored to multiple conditions. In Section 5, in order to be
installed on a cloud, we evaluated in depth the key properties
and the associated challenges that monitoring systems have to
face. Most of these challenges, as shown, have gained
attention from the scientific community and substantial
outcomes have been obtained. However, some of them do take
significant effort to reach the degree of sophistication needed
to incorporate them smoothly into such a complex
infrastructure. First of all, we address these properties and
problems in the following, dividing them into two macro-
categories: efficacy and performance. We then present a series
of obstacles that, in our opinion, cloud monitoring solutions
will have to address in the near term, suggesting potential
future cloud monitoring research directions.
7.1. Effectiveness The key unanswered problems are the
probability of getting a clear view of the cloud and
determining the initial causes of the phenomenon observed.
Improvements are required to accomplish this in terms of: I
custom algorithms and techniques that provide powerful
summaries, filtering and correlating information from various
probes; (ii) root cause analysis techniques capable of deriving
the causes of the phenomenon detected, spotting the correct
thread in the dynamic Cloud technology fabric; And (iii) in an
world controlled by virtualized services, very critically,
reliable interventions. We have identified numerous
contributions to this subject in Section 5 (e.g., [34,67,89]).
However, in both of these three study fields, we conclude that
the scope of the cloud needs more commitment (see e.g.[123]
for related 3 G network monitoring issues). As the control
framework for cloud environments has become a strategic
subsystem, its durability should be viewed as a fundamental
resource. Major contributions based on fault tolerance and on
VM migration and reconfiguration (e.g., [35,71]) were
highlighted in the review of the literature on this topic.
Building on this, we agree that more work is needed to make
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
existing cloud monitoring solutions secure as well. Timeliness
itself is expressly considered and tested only in[33], even
though it is indirectly discussed in Scalability and Adaptability
problems. This is a basic property that can be used
successfully to quantitatively assess and accurately equate a
cloud surveillance system with alternatives ( e.g. by
identifying a particular category of tracked occurrence and
calculating the time taken to access the control application for
the information). The use of the associated metric, Time to
Insight, and further analysis is required in this area to model
the relationships between the parameters involved in
Timeliness, should be used in possible proposals and
comparisons of cloud monitoring systems. Similar
considerations may be made regarding the property of a
control system 's availability: while it is directly linked to
scalability and efficiency, there are no evaluations of the
percentage of missing events to the best of our understanding.
Unanswered queries and similar failures in the use of the
monitoring subsystem and no clear design constraints
(possibly 100 percent, as monitoring is a critical feature) in
ensuring a given level of availability. The cost consequences
of achieving less than 100 percent availability should also be
considered and analysed.
7.2. Efficiency Key changes in terms of quality are planned
for data processing, referring to the problems reported in
Section 5. In particular , in order to handle the vast amount of
monitoring data required to provide a holistic view of the
Cloud, algorithms and strategies need to be more and more
effective, rapidly and consistently, and without adding too
much pressure on the Cloud and monitoring infrastructures in
terms of both computational and communication resources.
Therefore, the monitoring system should be able to execute
multiple data operations (collect, sort, aggregate, correlate,
dissect, store, etc.) in accordance with strict time, computing
capacity, and overhead communication specifications. With
the growing spread of cloud computing and, thus, the
increasing number of users and services, these specifications
are getting more and more stringent. In addition to the
enhancements mentioned above, we expect various potential
study avenues for cloud monitoring in the near future. They
are listed in detail below.
7.3. New monitoring techniques and tools In the one side,
very fine grained interventions should be able to include
successful tracking strategies and, on the other side, a virtual
cloud outlook, involving all the factors influencing the QoS
and other specifications. Around the same time, the
approaches do not subject the device to the output pressure
(think mobile cloud, for example). Finally, they should be
incorporated with a control methodology that controls the
enterprise system's performance. New monitoring techniques
and software specially developed for Cloud Computing are
needed for all these reasons.
7.4. Cross-layer monitoring To allow functional isolation,
modularity and thus manageability, the dynamic structure of
the Cloud consists of many layers. However, in terms of the
types of analysis and consequent behaviour that can be taken,
such heavy layering imposes many limitations on the control
system. These limitations include the inability to view lower-
1002
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
layer metrics for customers and upper-layer metrics for
providers. As a result , customers and manufacturers make
their preferences based on a short horizon. It is very difficult,
in terms of infrastructure, privacy and administration, to solve
this constraint.
7.5. Cross-domain monitoring Cloud Service Providers
provide multiple categories of infrastructure and levels of QoS
that can be used by cross-domain solutions to enhance
resource efficiency, end-to - end performance, and resilience.
Federated Clouds, Hybrid Clouds, multi-tenancy services The
partnership across several cloud infrastructures is referred to
as a resource federation when standardised, but such a
standardisation process is still at an early stage[134,135].
There is a high heterogeneity of programmes, software, and
knowledge shared among various cloud monitoring
infrastructures, and Federated Clouds monitoring is part of
ongoing research[147]. Compliance concerns add to these
standardisation problems: once domain borders are violated,
security constraints that can be applied between various cloud
infrastructures (Federated Clouds) are threatened by
surveillance operations. Between private and public clouds
(Hybrid Clouds) or between separate tenants (services for
multiple tenants). Technology analysis has concentrated on
cross-domain data leakage and prevention, where the
opportunity to track the performance of systems has been
viewed as a security vulnerability and tracking is an attack
tool[150], and not because of its potential usefulness in
measuring and estimating the performance of the service. As a
result, it is already a difficult challenge to achieve a robust
management system for cross-domain solutions and it has not
yet been sufficiently discussed in the literature.
7.6-Monitoring-of-novel-network-architectures-based-on
Clouds
Cloud-based networking, as stated in[143], is a modern
method of deploying distributed business networks across
highly resilient, multi-tenant applications that do not require
capital investment in networking equipment. Cloud-based
networking is incredibly simple, unlike conventional
hardware-based legacy technologies, allowing organisations to
instal remote locations in a limited period of time and run their
distributed networks with a cloud-based programme. Thus
offering high degree of unified control and network visibility
(thanks to protocols such as OpenFlow [144]).
OpenStack[107], with one of its associated ventures called
Quantum[145], is one of the most used frameworks for cloud-
based networks. Many major companies, such as Cisco and
Juniper, are involved in merging cloud-based networks into
their legacy networks and are trying to do so. In order to
incorporate and integrate Cloud-based networks, they expect
to use Software Oriented Networks[146], based on Open
Flows. Other approaches to networking, such as Information-
Centric Networking, have also been suggested as supporting
cloud management technologies[148]. As a result, to track and
manage these new network situations, management
technologies should be modified and enhanced.
7.7-Workload-generators-for-Cloud-scenarios
We addressed the problems and literature related to test
setup in Section 5 and, in particular, workload simulation and
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
generation in particular. This study shows that while numerous
contributions have been made in terms of actual and synthetic
workload research, a major remaining obstacle is that of
generators of workload explicitly developed for cloud
scenarios (see, for example,[124] for evolving networking
scenarios).
7.8-Energy& cost-efficient-monitoring
In terms of computational and networking capabilities,
and therefore in terms of energy and expense, monitoring
operations can be extremely taxing. Another significant
problem for cloud management systems of the next decade is
the efficiency of monitoring operations that meet their specific
criteria (accuracy, completeness , reliability, etc.), but
minimise the energy usage and expense associated with them.
7.9-Standard & common-test-beds & practice’s
It is very difficult to identify guidelines for cloud
monitoring protocols, formats, and measurements in the
literature. An effort in this direction should be made, in our
view. Open Cirrus[125], for example, is an open research test
of Cloud Computing intended to promote research on the
architecture, provisioning, and management of resources on a
national, multi-datacenter scale. The transparent design of the
test bed is intended to promote study into all areas of the
operation of services and datacenters. The shared use of
research facilities facilitates ways of exchanging equipment,
lessons learned and best practises, and ways of evaluating and
comparing alternative cloud management methods. Open
forums for equal comparison and tests with cloud monitoring
software and strategies are needed to facilitate the
advancement of the state of the art.
VIII. CONCLUSION
We have presented a thorough review of the state of the
art in the area of cloud monitoring in this article. Fig. Fig. 2
shows a taxonomy containing a brief snapshot of the key
facets of this paper that we have considered. We addressed in
more depth the key tasks in the cloud world that have a clear
advantage or a real need for tracking. We also presented
history and meanings for key terms in order to contextualise
and research cloud surveillance. We have also described the
key features that cloud monitoring systems should have, the
problems resulting from these features, and the relevant
insights given so far in the literature. We then identified the
key Cloud monitoring systems (both commercial and open
source) and resources, showing how they contribute to certain
properties and problems. Finally, in the area of Cloud
monitoring, we addressed open questions, issues and future
paths.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Mell, T. Grance, The NIST Definition of Cloud
Computing, NIST Special Publication 800-145, 2011. .
[2] M. Armbrust, A. Fox, R. Griffith, A.D. Joseph, R. Katz,
A. Konwinski, G. Lee, D. Patterson, A. Rabkin, I.
Stoica, M. Zaharia, A view of cloud computing,
Commun. ACM 53 (4) (2010) 50–58.
1003
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
[3] Gurdev Singh, Shanu Sood, Amit Sharma, CM-
measurement facets for cloud performance,
International Journal of Computer Applications 23 (3)
(2011).
[4] A. Ben Letaifa, A. Haji, M. Jebalia, S. Tabbane, State of
the art and research challenges of new services
architecture technologies: virtualization, SOA and cloud
computing, International Journal of Grid and
Distributed Computing 3 (4) (2010).
[5] C. Gong, J. Liu, Q. Zhang, H. Chen, Z. Gong, The
characteristics of cloud computing, in: 39th
International Conference on Parallel Processing
Workshops (ICPPW), 2010, pp. 275–279.
[6] S. Zhang, S. Zhang, X. Chen, X. Huo, Cloud computing
research and development trend, ICFN ’10 Second
International Conference on Future Networks, 93–97
(2010) 22–24.
[7] M. Ahmed, A. Sina, Md.R. Chowdhury, M. Ahmed,
Md.M.H. Rafee, An advanced survey on cloud
computing and state-of-the-art research issues, IJCSI 9
(1) (2012).
[8] B.P. Rimal, E. Choi, I. Lumb, A taxonomy and survey of
cloud computing systems, in: NCM’09. Fifth
International Joint Conference on INC, IMS and IDC,
2009, pp. 44–51.
[9] I. Foster, Y. Zhao, I. Raicu, S. Lu, Cloud computing and
grid computing 360-degree compared, in: Grid
Computing Environments, Workshop, 2008. GCE’08,
2008, pp. 1–10. [10] L. Atzori, F. Granelli, A. Pescapè,
A network-oriented survey and open issues in cloud
computing, in: Cloud Computing: Methodology,
System, and Applications, CRC, Taylor & Francis
Group, 2011.
[11] N.M. Chowdhury, R. Boutaba, A survey of network
virtualization, Computer Networks 54 (5) (2010) 862–
876. [12] S.N.T. Chiueh, A Survey on Virtualization
Technologies, RPE Report, 2005, pp. 1–42.
[13] Dimitrios Zissis, Dimitrios Lekkas, Addressing cloud
computing security issues, Future Generation Computer
Systems 28 (3) (2012) 583–592.
[14] Md. Tanzim Khorshed, A.B.M. Shawkat Ali, Saleh A.
Wasimi, A survey on gaps threat remediation challenges
and some thoughts for proactive attack detection in
cloud computing, Future Generation Computer Systems
28 (6) (2012) 833–851.
[15] J. Yang, Z. Chen, Cloud computing research and security
issues, in: International Conference on Computational
Intelligence and Software Engineering (CiSE), 2010,
pp. 1–3. [16] R. Choubey, R. Dubey, J. Bhattacharjee, A
survey on cloud computing security, challenges and
threats, International Journal 3 (2011).
[17] K. Ren, C. Wang, Q. Wang, Security challenges for the
public cloud, IEEE Internet Computing 16 (1) (2012)
69–73. [18] A. Goyal, S. Dadizadeh, A survey on cloud
computing, University of British Columbia Technical
Report for CS 508, 2009, pp. 55–58.
[19] S. Srinivasamurthy, D.Q. Liu, Survey on Cloud
Computing Security, 2010.
[20] F. Liu, J. Tong, J. Mao, R. Bohn, J. Messina, L. Badger,
D. Leaf, NIST Cloud Computing Reference
Architecture NIST Special Publication 500-292, 2011.
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[21] S. Woodward, Cloud Computing Measurement, IFP
Users Group, 2012.
[22] D.A. Menascé, V.A.F. Almeida, Capacity Planning for
Web Services: Metrics, Models, and Methods, Prentice
Hall, 2002.
[23] P. Hasselmeyer, N. d’Heureuse, Towards holistic multi-
tenant monitoring for virtual data centers, in: Network
Operations and Management Symposium Workshops
(NOMS Wksps), 2010 IEEE/ IFIP, 2010, pp. 350–356.
[24] J. Shao, Q. Wang, A performance guarantee approach
for cloud applications based on monitoring, in:
Computer Software and Applications Conference
Workshops (COMPSACW), 2011 IEEE 35th Annual,
2011, pp. 25–30. [25] G. Katsaros, R. Kübert, G.
Gallizo, Building a service-oriented monitoring
framework with REST and nagios, in: 2011 IEEE
International Conference on Services Computing
(SCC), 2011, pp. 426–431.
[26] A. Viratanapanu, A.K.A. Hamid, Y. Kawahara, T.
Asami, On demand fine grain resource monitoring
system for server consolidation, in: Kaleidoscope:
Beyond the Internet? – Innovations for Future Networks
and Services, 2010 ITU-T, IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–8.
[27] S. Ferretti, V. Ghini, F. Panzieri, M. Pellegrini, E.
Turrini, QoS–Aware clouds, in: 2010 IEEE 3rd
International Conference on Cloud Computing
(CLOUD), 2010, pp. 321–328.
[28] Jin Shao, Hao Wei, Qianxiang Wang, Hong Mei, A
runtime model based monitoring approach for cloud, in:
2010 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Cloud
Computing (CLOUD), 2010, pp. 313–320.
[29] G.T. Lakshmanan, P. Keyser, A. Slominski, F. Curbera,
R. Khalaf, A business centric end-to-end monitoring
approach for service composites, in: 2010 IEEE
International Conference on Services Computing
(SCC), 2010, pp. 409–416.
[30] H.T. Dinh, C. Lee, D. Niyato, P. Wang, A survey of
mobile cloud computing: Architecture,applications and
approaches, Wireless Communications and Mobile
Computing (2011). p. n/a.
[31] J.S. Park, H.C. Yu, K.S. Chung, E.Y. Lee, Markov
chain based monitoring service for fault tolerance in
mobile cloud computing, in: 2011 IEEE Workshops of
International Conference on Advanced Information
Networking and Applications (WAINA), 2011, pp.
520– 525.
[32] S. Padhy, D. Kreutz, A. Casimiro, M. Pasin, Trustworthy
and resilient monitoring system for cloud
infrastructures, in: Proceedings of the Workshop on
Posters and Demos Track, Ser. PDT ’11, ACM, New
York, NY, USA, 2011.
[33] C. Wang, K. Schwan, V. Talwar, G. Eisenhauer, L. Hu,
M. Wolf, A flexible architecture integrating monitoring
and analytics for managing large-scale data centers, in:
Proceedings of ICAC, 2011.
[34] M. Rak, S. Venticinque, T. Mahr, G. Echevarria, G.
Esnal, Cloud application monitoring: the mOSAIC
approach, in: 2011 IEEE Third International Conference
on Cloud Computing Technology and Science
(CloudCom), IEEE, 2011, pp. 758–763.
1004
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
[35] P. Massonet, S. Naqvi, C. Ponsard, J. Latanicki, B.
Rochwerger, M. Villari, A monitoring and audit logging
architecture for data location compliance in federated
cloud infrastructures, in: 2011 IEEE International
Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing
Workshops and Phd Forum (IPDPSW), 2011, pp. 1510–
1517.
[36] A. Khurshid, A. Al-Nayeem, I. Gupta, Performance
evaluation of the illinois cloud computing testbed,
Unpublished, Tech. Rep., 2009.
[37] L. Romano, D.D. Mari, Z. Jerzak, C. Fetzer, A novel
approach to QoS monitoring in the cloud, in:
International Conference on Data Compression,
Communications and Processing, vol. 0, 2011, pp. 45–
51.
[38] M. Armbrust et al., Above the clouds: a berkeley view of
cloud computing. EECS Department, UCB, Tech. Rep.
UCB/EECS-2009-28, 2009.
[39] J. Schad, J. Dittrich, J.A.Q. Ruiz, Runtime measurements
in the cloud: observing, analyzing, and reducing
variance, in: Proc. VLDB Endow., vol. 3(1–2), 2010,
pp. 460–471.
[40] Y. Chen, V. Paxson, R. H. Katz, What’s New about
Cloud Computing Security? Technical Report No.
UCB/EECS-2010-5, 2010.
[41] J. Spring, Monitoring cloud computing by layer, Part 1,
IEEE Security & Privacy 9 (2) (2011) 66–68.
[42] J. Spring, Monitoring cloud computing by layer, Part 2,
IEEE Security & Privacy 9 (3) (2011) 52–55.
[43] B. Rochwerger, D. Breitgand, E. Levy, A. Galis, et al.,
The RESERVOIR model and architecture for open
federated cloud computing, IBM Journal of Research
and Development 53 (4) (2009).
[44] M. Kutare, G. Eisenhauer, C. Wang, K. Schwan, V.
Talwar, M. Wolf, Monalytics: online monitoring and
analytics for managing large scale data centers, in:
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Autonomic Computing, Ser. ICAC ’10, ACM, New
York, NY, USA, 2010, pp. 141–150. [45] V. Kumar, Z.
Cai, B.F. Cooper, G. Eisenhauer, K. Schwan, M.
Mansour, B. Seshasayee, P. Widener, Implementing
diverse messaging models with self-managing
properties using IFLOW, in: ICAC, 2006.
[46] Frédéric Desprez, Eddy Caron, Luis Rodero-Merino,
Adrian Muresan, Auto-scaling, load balancing and
monitoring in commercial and open-source clouds, in:
Cloud Computing: Methodology, System and
Applications, CRC Press, 2011. [47] Y. Mei, L. Liu, X.
Pu, S. Sivathanu, Performance measurements and
analysis of network I/O applications in virtualized
cloud, in: 2010 IEEE 3rd International Conference on
Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2010, pp. 59–66.
[48] http://www.hyperic.com/products/cloud-status-
monitoring.
[49] R.P. Karrer, I. Matyasovszki, A. Botta, A. Pescapè,
MagNets – experiences from deploying a joint research-
operational nextgeneration wireless access network
testbed, in: Proceedings of International Conference on
Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the
Development of Networks and Communities
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
(TRIDENTCOM), May 2007, Orlando, Florida (USA),
to appear.
[50] M. Bernaschi, F. Cacace, A. Pescapè, S. Za, Analysis
and experimentation over heterogeneous wireless
networks, in: First IEEE International Conference on
Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the
DEvelopment of NeTworks and COMmunities
(TRIDENTCOM’05) – ISBN 0-7695-2219-X/05,
February 2005, Trento (Italy), 2005, pp. 182–191. [51]
S. Sundaresan, W. de Donato, N. Feamster, R. Teixeira,
S. Crawford, A. Pescapè, Broadband internet
performance: a view from the gateway, in: ACM
SIGCOMM 2011 Proceedings, Toronto, ON, Canada,
August 15–19, 2011.
[52] A. Botta, A. Pescapè, G. Ventre, Quality of service
statistics over heterogeneous networks: analysis and
applications, in: Special Issue of Elesevier EJOR on
‘Performance Evaluation of QoS-aware Heterogeneous
Systems’, vol 191(3), 2008, pp. 1075–1088.
[53] Vinod Venkataraman, Ankit Shah, Yin Zhang, Network-
Based Measurements on Cloud Computing Services. .
[54] Security Guidance for Critical Areas of Focus in Cloud
Computing v2.1, Cloud Security Alliance, 2009. .
[55] S. Clayman, A. Galis, L. Mamatas, Monitoring virtual
networks with lattice, in: Network Operations and
Management Symposium Workshops (NOMS Wksps),
2010 IEEE/IFIP, 2010, pp. 239–246.
[56] F. Azmandian, M. Moffie, J.G. Dy, J.A. Aslam, D.R.
Kaeli, Workload characterization at the virtualization
layer, in: 2011 IEEE 19th International Symposium on
Modeling, Analysis & Simulation of Computer and
Telecommunication Systems (MASCOTS), 25–27 July
2011, pp. 63–72.
[57] S. Clayman, R. Clegg, L. Mamatas, G. Pavlou, A. Galis,
Monitoring, aggregation and filtering for efficient
management of virtual networks, in: Proceedings of the
7th International Conference on Network and Services
Management, 2011, pp. 234–240.
[58] R. Mehrotra, A. Dubey, S. Abdelwahed, W. Monceaux,
Large scale monitoring and online analysis in a
distributed virtualized environment, in: 2011 Eighth
IEEE International Conference and Workshops on
Engineering of Autonomic and Autonomous Systems,
2011, pp. 1–9.
[59] M.L. Massie, B.N. Chun, D.E. Culler, The ganglia
distributed monitoring system: design, implementation
and experience, Parallel Computing 30 (2004).
[60] Nagios. . [61] M.B. de Carvalho, L.Z. Granville,
Incorporating Virtualization Awareness in Service
Monitoring Systems, 2011.
[62] Rizwan Mian, Patrick Martin, Jose Luis Vazquez-Poletti,
Provisioning data analytic workloads in a cloud, Future
Generation Computer Systems (2012).
[63] Waheed Iqbal, Matthew N. Dailey, David Carrera, Paul
Janecek, Adaptive resource provisioning for read
intensive multi-tier applications in the cloud, Future
Generation Computer Systems 27 (6) (2011) 871–879.
ISSN 0167-739X, 10.1016/ j.future.2010.10.016.
[64] Vincent C. Emeakaroha, Marco A.S. Netto, Rodrigo N.
Calheiros, Ivona Brandic, Rajkumar Buyya, César A.F.
De Rose, Towards autonomic detection of SLA
1005
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
violations in cloud infrastructures, Future Generation
Computer Systems (2012).
[65] A. Ayad, U. Dippel, Agent-based monitoring of virtual
machines, in: 2010 International Symposium in
Information Technology (ITSim), vol. 1, 2010, pp. 1–6.
[66] C. Vecchiola, X. Chu, R. Buyya, Aneka: a software
platform for NETbased cloud computing, in: W.
Gentzsch, L. Grandinetti, G. Joubert (Eds.), High Speed
and Large Scale Scientific Computing, IOS, 2009, pp.
267–295.
[67] Z. Hill, M. Humphrey, A quantitative analysis of high
performance computing with Amazon’s EC2
infrastructure: the death of the local cluster? in: 2009
10th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Grid
Computing, 13–15 October 2009, pp. 26–33.
[68] G. Wang, T.S.E. Ng, The impact of virtualization on
network performance of amazon ec2 data center, in:
2010 Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 2010, pp. 1–9.
[69] Jean-Claude Laprie, From dependability to
resilience, in: IEEE/IFIP International Conference on
Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN), 2008.
[70] Robert W. Shirey, Internet security glossary, Internet
Engineering Task Force RFC 4949 Informational, 2007.
[71] G. Xiang, H. Jin, D. Zou, X. Zhang, S. Wen, F.
Zhao, VMDriver: a driver-based monitoring mechanism
for virtualization, in: 2010 29th IEEE Symposium on
Reliable Distributed Systems, 2010, pp. 72–81.
[72] S. Ostermann, A. Iosup, N. Yigitbasi, R. Prodan, T.
Fahringer, D.H.J. Epema, A performance analysis of
EC2 cloud computing services for scientific computing,
in: Cloud Computing, Springer, 2010, pp. 115– 131.
[73] The SRT-15 Project. . [74] A. Bessani, From byzantine
fault tolerance to intrusion tolerance (A Position Paper),
in: 5th Workshop on Recent Advances in
IntrusionTolerant Systems (WRAITS), DSN, 2011.
[75] C. Vecchiola, S. Candey, R. Buyya, High-performance
cloud computing: a view of scientific applications, in:
2009 10th International Symposium on Pervasive
Systems, Algorithms, and Networks (ISPAN), 14–16
December 2009, pp. 4–16.
[76] Edward Walker, Benchmarking amazon EC2 for high-
performance scientific computing, in: LOGIN, vol.
33(5), 2008, pp. 18–23.
[77] A. Ganapathi, Yanpei Chen, A. Fox, R. Katz, D.
Patterson, Statisticsdriven workload modeling for the
Cloud, in: 2010 IEEE 26th International Conference on
Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW), 1–6 March
2010, pp. 87–92.
[78] Y. Chen, A.S. Ganapathi, R. Griffith, R.H. Katz,
Towards understanding cloud performance tradeoffs
using statistical workload analysis and replay,
University of California at Berkeley, Technical, Report
No. UCB/EECS-2010-81, 2010. [79] Hongzhang Shan,
Katie Antypas, John Shalf, Characterizing and
predicting the I/O performance of HPC applications
using a parameterized synthetic benchmark, in:
Proceedings of the 2008 ACM/IEEE Conference on
Supercomputing (SC ‘08).
[80] Donald Kossmann, Tim Kraska, Simon Loesing, An
evaluation of alternative architectures for transaction
processing in the cloud, in: Proceedings of the 2010
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
International Conference on Management of Data
(SIGMOD ‘10), ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2010, pp.
579–590.
[81] Jiang Dejun, Guillaume Pierre, Chi-Hung Chi, EC2
performance analysis for resource provisioning of
service-oriented applications, in: Proceedings of the
2009 International Conference on ServiceOriented,
Computing (ICSOC/ServiceWave’09).
[82] Devarshi Ghoshal, Richard Shane Canon, Lavanya
Ramakrishnan, I/ O performance of virtualized cloud
environments, in: Proceedings of the Second
International Workshop on Data Intensive Computing in
the Clouds (DataCloud-SC ‘11).
[83] Carsten Binnig, Donald Kossmann, Tim Kraska, Simon
Loesing, How is the weather tomorrow? Towards a
benchmark for the cloud, in: Proceedings of the Second
International Workshop on Testing Database Systems
(DBTest ‘09), ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2009. [84]
TPC. TPC-H Benchmark 2.8, 2008.
[85] TPC. TPC-C Benchmark 5.10.1, 2009. [86] TPC. TPC-
W Benchmark 1.8, 2002.
[87] Ahmed Abujoda, Network measurements in virtualized
networks and its challenges, in: 6th GI/ITG KuVS
Workshop on Future Internet, 22 November 2010 in
Hannover, Germany. [88] I.M. Rafika, N. Sadeque, JA
Andersson, A. Johnsson, Time-stamping accuracy in
virtualized environments, in: 2011 13th International
Conference on Advanced Communication Technology
(ICACT), 2011, pp. 475–480.
[89] J. Whiteaker, F. Schneider, R. Teixeira, Explaining
packet delays under virtualization, ACM SIGCOMM
Computer Communication Review 41 (1) (2011).
[90] L. Youseff, K. Seymour, H. You, J. Dongarra, R.
Wolski, The impact of paravirtualized memory
hierarchy on linear algebra computational kernels and
software, in: Proceedings of the 17th International
Symposium on High Performance, Distributed
Computing, 2008, pp. 141–152.
[91] H. Newman, I. Legrand, P. Galvez, R. Voicu, C.
Cirstoiu, MonALISA: a distributed monitoring service
architecture, CHEP03, La Jolla, California, 2003.
[92] A. Cooke, A.J.G. Gray, L. Ma, W. Nuttetal, R-GMA: an
information integration system for grid monitoring, in:
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on
Cooperative, Information Systems, 2003, pp. 462–481.
[93] S. Andreozzi, N. De Bortoli, S. Fantinel, A. Ghiselli,
G.L. Rubini, G. Tortone, M.C. Vistoli, GridICE: a
monitoring service for grid systems, Future Generation
Computer Systems 21 (4) (2005) 559–571.
[94] S. Zanikolas, R. Sakellariou, A taxonomy of grid
monitoring systems, Future Generation Computer
Systems 21 (1) (2005) 163–188.
[95]http://awsdocs.s3.amazonaws.com/AmazonCloudWatch/l
atest/ acw-dg.pdf. [96]
http://www.cloudkick.com/home.
[97]http://www.nimsoft.com/solutions/nimsoft-
monitor/cloud.
[98] A. V. Dastjerdi, S. G. H. Tabatabaei, R. Buyya, A
dependency-aware ontology-based approach for
deploying service level agreement monitoring services
1006
Volume 5, Issue 10, October – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
in cloud, Software: Practice and Experience 42 (2012)
501–518.
[99]http://portal.monitis.com/.[100]http://www.logicmonitor.
com/monitoring/storage/netapp-filers/.
[101] http://www.manjrasoft.com/. [102] Rodrigo N.
Calheiros, Christian Vecchiola, Dileban
Karunamoorthy, Rajkumar Buyya, The Aneka platform
and QoS-driven resource provisioning for elastic
applications on hybrid clouds, Future Generation
Computer Systems 28 (6) (2012) 861–870.
[103] http://www.infolinux.it/utility/eucalyptus-il-cloud-
open-source/. [104]
http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/nagioscore-3-en.pdf.
[105]http://opennebula.org/documentation:archives:rel2.0:im
g [106] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenNebula.
[107]http://docs.openstack.org/diablo/openstack-
compute/admin/oscompute-adminguide-trunk.pdf.
[108]http://www.cloudstack.org/.
[109]
https://github.com/zenoss/ZenPacks.zenoss.CloudStack.
[110] http://www.nimbusproject.org/.
[111] S.A. Chaves, R.B. Uriarte, C.B. Westphall, Toward an
architecture for monitoring private clouds, IEEE
Communications Magazine 49 (2011) 130–137.
[112] https://cloudsleuth.net/. [113]
http://cloudharmony.com/. [114]
http://radlab.cs.berkeley.edu/wiki/Projects/Cloudstone.
[115] W. Sobel et al., Cloudstone: multi-platform multi-
language benchmark and measurement tools for Web
2.0, in: Proceedings of the Cloud Computing and Its
Applications, 2008.
[116] http://cloudcmp.net/. [117] A. Li, X. Yang, S. Kandula,
M. Zhang, CloudCmp: comparing public cloud
providers, in: Proceedings of the 10th Annual
Conference on Internet Measurement, IMC ‘10, ACM,
New York, NY, USA, 2010, pp. 1–14.
[118] http://www.cloudclimate.com.
[119] http://www.cloudyn.com/.
[120] http://www.uptimesoftware.com/cloud-monitoring.php.
[121] http://cloudcruiser.com/. [122]
http://cloudfloor.com/. [123] A. Botta, A. Pescapè, C.
Guerrini, M. Mangri, A customer service assurance
platform for mobile broadband networks, IEEE
Communications Magazine 49 (10) (2011) 101–109.
[124] A. Dainotti, A. Botta, A. Pescapè, A tool for the
generation of realistic network workload for emerging
networking scenarios, Computer Networks (2012).
[125] https://opencirrus.org/. [126] B. Kitchenham,
Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews, Keele
University Technical, Report TR/SE-0401, 2004.
[127] http://www.vmware.com/support/pubs/vsphere-esxi-
vcenterserver-pubs.html.
[128] A. Corradi, L. Foschini, J. Povedano-Molina, J.M.
Lopez-Soler, ‘‘DDSenabled Cloud management support
for fast task offloading,’’ Computers and
Communications (ISCC), 2012 IEEE Symposium on,
1–4 July 2012, pp. 67–74. [129]
http://www.gwos.com/features/.
[130] P. Samimi, A. Patel, Review of pricing models for grid
& cloud computing, in: 2011 IEEE Symposium on
IJISRT20OCT447 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Computers & Informatics (ISCI), IEEE, 2011, pp. 634–
639.
[131] I. Foster, Y. Zhao, I. Raicu, S. Lu, Cloud computing
and grid computing 360-degree compared, in: Grid
Computing Environments Workshop, 2008.
GCE039;08, IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–10.
[132] I. Foster, C. Kesselman, The Grid: Blueprint for a New
Computing Infrastructure, Morgan Kaufmann, 2004.
[133] R. VBuyya, Chee Shin Yeo, S. Venugopal, J. Broberg,
I. Brandic, Cloud computing and emerging IT
platforms: vision, hype, and reality for delivering
computing as the 5th utility, Future Generation
Computer Systems 25 (6) (2009) 99–616. [134]
http://www.opencloudware.org/.
[135] http://www.compatibleone.org/.
[136] https://boundary.com/.
[137] http://www.paraleap.com/azurewatch.
[138] http://sourceforge.net/projects/hyperic-hq/.
[139] http://www.sonian.com/cloud-monitoring-sensu/.
[140] http://newrelic.com/enterprise/visibility.
[141] J. Du, N. Sehrawat, W. Zwaenepoel, Performance
profiling of virtual machines, in: 7th ACM
SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual
Execution Environments (VEE ‘11), ACM, New York,
NY, USA, 2011, pp. 3–14.
[142] A. M. Aljohani, D.R.W. Holton, I.-U. Awan, J.S.
Alanazi, Performance evaluation of local and cloud
deployment of web clusters, in: NBiS 2011, pp. 274–
278. [143] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud-
based_networking.
[144] http://www.openflow.org/.
[145] http://wiki.openstack.org/Quantum.
[146]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Defined_Networ
king.
[147] M. Villari, I. Brandic, and F. Tusa (Eds.), Achieving
Federated and Self-Manageable Cloud Infrastructures:
Theory and Practice, (FSCI11) IGi Global, 2012, pp. 1–
17.
[148] B. Ohlman, A. Eriksson, R. Rembarz, What networking
of information can do for cloud computing, in: IEEE
International Workshops on Enabling Technologies:
Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises
(WETICE’09), 2009, pp. 78–83.
[149] B. Rochwerger, D. Breitgand, A. Epstein, D. Hadas, I.
Loy, K. Nagin, J. Tordsson, C. Ragusa, M. Villari, S.
Clayman, E. Levy, A. Maraschini, P. Massonet, H.
Muñoz, G. Tofetti, Reservoir – when one cloud is not
enough, Computer 44 (3) (2011) 44–51.
[150] T. Ristenpart, E. Tromer, H. Shacham, S. Savage, Hey,
you, get off of my cloud: exploring information leakage
in third-party compute clouds, in: Proceedings of the
16th ACM Conference on Computer and
Communications, Security, 2009, pp. 199–212.
1007