Download Migration

Advanced
Operating Systems
Lecture 12: Process migration
University of Tehran
Dept. of EE and Computer Engineering
By:
Dr. Nasser Yazdani
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
1
Covered topic


Process migration, Why? And how.
References


Chapter 3 of the text book
Fred Douglis and John Ousterhout, “Transparent
Process Migration: Design Alternatives and the
Sprite Implementation”
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
2
Outline






Motivation for migration
How does migration occur?
Resource migration
Agent-based system
Details of process migration
Problems
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
3
Motivation


Key reasons: performance and flexibility
Process migration (strong mobility)



Improved system-wide performance – better
utilization of system-wide resources
Idle workstations
Code migration (weak mobility)



Shipment of server code to client – filling forms
(reduce communication, no need to pre-link stubs
with client)
Ship parts of client application to server instead of
data from server to client (e.g., databases)
Improve
– agent-based
web searches4
Univ. of Tehran parallelism
Distributed
Operating Systems
Motivation

Flexibility


Dynamic configuration of distributed system
Clients don’t need preinstalled software –
download on demand
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
5
Migration models


Process = code seg + resource seg + execution seg
Weak versus strong mobility




Sender-initiated versus receiver-initiated
Sender-initiated (code is with sender)



Weak => transferred code (program) starts from initial
the state (Java Applets). Simple
Strong => move execution segment
Client sending a query to database server
Client should be pre-registered
Receiver-initiated


Java applets
Receiver can be anonymous
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
6
Who executes migrated
entity?

Code migration:



Execute in a separate process
[Applets] Execute in target process
Process migration


Remote cloning
Migrate the process
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
7
Models for Code Migration

Alternatives for code migration.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
8
Do Resources Migrate?

Depends on resource to process binding




By identifier: specific web site, ftp server
By value: Java libraries
By type: printers, local devices
Depends on type of “attachments”


Unattached to any node: data files
Fastened resources (moved only at high cost)


Database, web sites
Fixed resources

Local devices, communication end points
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
9
Resource Migration
Actions
Resource-to machine binding
Unattached
Process-toresource
binding





By identifier MV (or GR)
CP ( or MV, GR)
By value
RB (or GR, CP)
By type
Fastened
Fixed
GR (or MV)
GR (or CP)
RB (or GR, CP)
GR
GR
RB (or GR)
Actions to be taken with respect to the references to local
resources when migrating code to another machine.
GR: establish global system-wide reference
MV: move the resources
CP: copy the resource
RB: rebind process to locally available resource
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
10
Migration in Heterogeneous
Systems

Systems can be heterogeneous (different architecture, OS)



Support only weak mobility: recompile code, no run time information
Strong mobility: recompile code segment, transfer execution segment
[migration stack]
Virtual machines - interpret source (scripts) or intermediate code
[Java]
Migration on
Only subroutine
Or method
Call
Migrate stack
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
11
Cost of migration

Multiprocessor: nondistributed


loss of the lines associated with the process in the
processor's instruction a data caches
Distributed environment





Moving a process's virtual memory
Forwarding a process's IPC (local and network) messages,
informing senders of the process's new contact information.
Moving information of files. the open file table, the file
descriptor table, the file offset, dirty blocks in the buffer
cache, &c
Moving the process's user-level state: registers, stack, &c
Moving the process's kernel-level state: pwd, pid, signal
masks,
&c
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
12
Cost of migration (partial
migration)


Migration of the whole process too expensive.
Move certain aspects of a process

The remaining portions of the process create
residual dependencies -- the migrated process still
relies on the original host to provide the services
that were not migrated.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
13
Migrating Virtual memory

Freeze and copy migration: Suspend or freeze the
process on the original host, and then to copy all of
the pages of memory to the new host. Once all done,
process can be resumed on the new host.




Simple, clean and easy to implement.
Does not create a residual dependency
Many pages which are never used may be copied and sent
over the network If the process is migrated several times,
this cost adds up
Do nothing while copying?
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
14
Migrating Virtual memory

Precopying: The process runs on the original
host, while the pages are being copied.




It is clean -- it does not create any residual
dependencies.
Copying pages that may never be used.
Dirty pages must be transferred. Can be more
expensive
lazy migration: like demand paging.

It creates residual dependencies
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
15
Migrating Virtual memory

Distributed file system: a memory-mapped file.
the process's memory can be migrated simply
by flushing the dirty blocks and mapping the
file from a different host.

Isn't as clean as it may seem
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
16
Migrating Communication
Channels

If a process migrates, its communications must
be able to continue.

Inform "interested" processes of the new location of
a migrating process.


Unclean, unnecessary messages, how to know other
communicating clients?
link redirection or forwarding at the original host of
the migrating process.

Residual dependency and can increase the latency
involved in sending messages to the migrated process,
but makes the process of migration itself cheaper
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
17
Process with open files

Show up at the new host and re-open the files.
But, in truth, there is a great deal of state
associated with an open file. Consider the
system-wide open file table, the cached inodes,
dirty blocks that may live only in the local
buffer cache, &c.


fork()'d proceses share the same file offset.
it is often much easier to leave the process
dependent on the old host for file service.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
18
Migrate kernel state


It is often easier to leave a migrating process
dependent on a prior (or perhaps first) host for
these services.
Checkpointing and recovery: A process's state
to be saved to a file (much like a persistent
object) and then a new process to be created
(restored) based on this checkpoint file. This
checkpoint file contains all of the "goods"
including the kernel material.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
19
Migrate? Or not migrate?

Several things to consider



If the home host suffers from a bursty load, it may not make
sense to migrate a process -- the home host will be free
again, soon.
Processes with significant virtual memory or IPC usage or
many open files are poor choices for migration.
Historical consideration: long running processes are better
candidates than recent arrivals – they are likely to continue
to run for a long time. Short lived processes are likely to
complete shortly after migration, offering little gain to
amortize the cost of migration over useful work.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
20
Design Issues

Measure of load


Types of policies






Queue lengths at CPU, CPU utilization
Static: decisions hardwired into system
Dynamic: uses load information
Adaptive: policy varies according to load
Preemptive versus non-preemptive
Centralized versus decentralized
Stability: l>m => instability, l1+l2<m1+m2=>load
balance

Job floats around and load oscillates
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
21
Components

Transfer policy: when to transfer a process?


Threshold-based policies are common and easy
Selection policy: which process to transfer?


Prefer new processes
Transfer cost should be small compared to execution cost


Location policy: where to transfer the process?


Select processes with long execution times
Polling, random, nearest neighbor
Information policy: when and from where?

Demand driven [only if sender/receiver], time-driven
[periodic], state-change-driven [send update if load
changes]
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
22
Sender-initiated Policy



Transfer policy
Selection policy: newly arrived process
Location policy: three variations


Random: may generate lots of transfers =>
limit max transfers
Threshold: probe n nodes sequentially


Transfer to first node below threshold, if none,
keep job
Shortest: poll Np nodes in parallel
Distributed Operating Systems
Choose least
loaded node below T
Univ. of Tehran

23
Receiver-initiated Policy



Transfer policy: If departing process causes
load < T, find a process from elsewhere
Selection policy: newly arrived or partially
executed process
Location policy:

Threshold: probe up to Np other nodes
sequentially


Transfer from first one above threshold, if none, do
nothing
Shortest: poll n nodes in parallel, choose node
with
heaviest load
above T
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
24
Symmetric Policies

Nodes act as both senders and receivers:
combine previous two policies without
change


Use average load as threshold
Improved symmetric policy: exploit polling
information


Two thresholds: LT, UT, LT <= UT
Maintain sender, receiver and OK nodes using
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
25
Case Study: V-System
(Stanford)

State-change driven information policy




Significant change in CPU/memory utilization
is broadcast to all other nodes
M least loaded nodes are receivers,
others are senders
Sender-initiated with new job selection
policy
Location policy: probe random receiver, if
still receiver, transfer job, else try another
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
26
Sprite (Berkeley)


Workstation environment => owner is king!
Centralized information policy: coordinator keeps info





State-change driven information policy
Receiver: workstation with no keyboard/mouse activity for
30 seconds and # active processes < number of
processors
Selection policy: manually done by user =>
workstation becomes sender
Location policy: sender queries coordinator
WS with foreign process becomes sender if user
becomes active: selection policy=> home
workstation
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
27
Sprite (contd)

Sprite process migration


Facilitated by the Sprite file system
State transfer




Swap everything out
Send page tables and file descriptors to receiver
Demand page process in
Only dependencies are communication-related

Univ. of Tehran
Redirect communication from home WS to receiver
Distributed Operating Systems
28
Overview of Code Migration in
D'Agents (1)

A simple example of a Tel agent in D'Agents
submitting a script to a remote machine
(adapted from [gray.r95])
proc factorial n {
if ($n  1) { return 1; }
expr $n * [ factorial [expr $n – 1] ]
# fac(1) = 1
# fac(n) = n * fac(n – 1)
}
set number …
# tells which factorial to compute
set machine …
# identify the target machine
agent_submit $machine –procs factorial –vars number –script {factorial $number }
agent_receive …
Univ. of Tehran
# receive the results (left unspecified for simplicity)
Distributed Operating Systems
29
Overview of Code Migration in
D'Agents (2)

An example of a Tel agent in D'Agents migrating to different
machines where it executes the UNIX who command (adapted
from [gray.r95])
all_users $machines
proc all_users machines {
set list ""
foreach m $machines {
agent_jump $m
set users [exec who]
append list $users
}
return $list
}
set machines …
set this_machine
# Create an initially empty list
# Consider all hosts in the set of given machines
# Jump to each host
# Execute the who command
# Append the results to the list
# Return the complete list when done
# Initialize the set of machines to jump to
# Set to the host that starts the agent
# Create a migrating agent by submitting the script to this machine, from where
# it will jump to all the others in $machines.
agent_submit $this_machine –procs all_users
-vars machines
-script { all_users $machines }
Univ. of …
Tehran
Distributed
Operating
Systems for simplicity)
agent_receive
#receive
the results
(left unspecified
30
Agents

Software agents



Autonomous process capable of reacting to,
and initiating changes in its environment,
possibly in collaboration
More than a “process” – can act on its own
Mobile agent



Capability to move between machines
Needs support for strong mobility
Example: D’Agents (aka Agent TCL)
Support for heterogeneous systems, uses
languages
Univ. of interpreted
Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems

31
Implementation Issues (1)

The architecture of the D'Agents system.
•Lowest: communication
•Server: agent management, comm. Among
agent, auth.
•RTS: start & end agents,
Etc.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
32
Implementation Issues (2)

The parts comprising the state of an agent in D'Agents.
Status
Description
Global interpreter variables
Variables needed by the interpreter of an agent
Global system variables
Return codes, error codes, error strings, etc.
Global program variables
User-defined global variables in a program
Procedure definitions
Definitions of scripts to be executed by an agent
Stack of commands
Stack of commands currently being executed
Stack of call frames
Stack of activation records, one for each running
command
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
33
Software Agents in
Distributed Systems
Property
Common
to all
agents?
Description
Autonomous
Yes
Can act on its own
Reactive
Yes
Responds timely to changes in its environment
Proactive
Yes
Initiates actions that affects its environment
Communicative
Yes
Can exchange information with users and other
agents
Continuous
No
Has a relatively long lifespan
Mobile
No
Can migrate from one site to another
Adaptive
No
Capable of learning

Some important properties by which different types
of agents can be distinguished.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
34
Agent Technology

The general model of an agent platform (adapted from
[fipa98-mgt]).
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
35
Agent Communication
Languages (1)

Examples of different message types in the FIPA ACL [fipa98-acl],
giving the purpose of a message, along with the description of the
actual message content.
Message purpose
Description
Message Content
INFORM
Inform that a given proposition is true
Proposition
QUERY-IF
Query whether a given proposition is true
Proposition
QUERY-REF
Query for a give object
Expression
CFP
Ask for a proposal
Proposal specifics
PROPOSE
Provide a proposal
Proposal
ACCEPT-PROPOSAL Tell that a given proposal is accepted
Proposal ID
REJECT-PROPOSAL
Tell that a given proposal is rejected
Proposal ID
REQUEST
Request that an action be performed
Action specification
SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to an information source
Reference to
source
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
36
Agent Communication
Languages (2)

Field
Value
Purpose
INFORM
Sender
max@http://fanclub-beatrix.royalty-spotters.nl:7239
Receiver
elke@iiop://royalty-watcher.uk:5623
Language
Prolog
Ontology
genealogy
Content
female(beatrix),parent(beatrix,juliana,bernhard)
A simple example of a FIPA ACL message sent between two
agents using Prolog to express genealogy information.
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
37
Next Lecture


Files in distributed systems.
References

Chapter 10 of the book
Univ. of Tehran
Distributed Operating Systems
38