Paper detail

Iso-Quality of Service: Fairly Ranking Servers for Real-Time Data Analytics

We present a mathematically rigorous Quality-of-Service (QoS) metric which relates the achievable quality of service metric (QoS) for a real-time analytics service to the server energy cost of offering the service. Using a new iso-QoS evaluation methodology, we scale server resources to meet QoS targets and directly rank the servers in terms of their energy-efficiency and by extension cost of ownership. Our metric and method are platform-independent and enable fair comparison of datacenter compute servers with significant architectural diversity, including micro-servers. We deploy our metric and methodology to compare three servers running financial option pricing workloads on real-life market data. We find that server ranking is sensitive to data inputs and desired QoS level and that although scale-out micro-servers can be up to two times more energy-efficient than conventional heavyweight servers for the same target QoS, they are still six times less energy efficient than high-performance computational accelerators.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.