[ Cloud Computing ] Re: Compute surface as a traded commodity?

I am not sure why we are looking for one single resource to meter. I would expect that various resource meters will be used as cost drivers in determining appropriate charges that will be passed up to the next layer on the cloud computing stack with each layer in the stack introducing its own meters derived partially from lower level meters - partially because there must be value added somewhere.

Once we get above the bare metal platform I expect to see more diversity in costing and billing approaches. Currently we seem to have carried over a large amount of baggage tied to current (legacy in this context) enterprise system/network management approaches that provide very coarse grain resource metering at the process level or data traffic pattern levels. I am confident this will change to more (user/software) activity based costing with the metering correlated to actual software execution performed on behalf of the user or cloud service. Unlike our opaque OS based process containers threads of execution in the cloud will operate as lawyers do today - billing the client context for every activity perform using various meters (wall clock time, number of photocopied sheets, number of letters dispatches with postage,........). Threads will not touch a resource unless they have a client billing code. This will never be possible with ESM/NSM because one cannot see the computing above it and the other below it.

http://www.jinspired.com/products/jxinsight/meteringthecloud.html

Kind regards,

William


Christopher Drumgoole wrote:

Given the variances in CPU clock speeds, Gigahertz Hour is easier to compare.  --- Chris Drumgoole     -----Original Message----- From: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com [mailto:cloud-computing@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pittard, Rick Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 11:50 AM To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Re: Compute surface as a traded commodity?   Actually, the price of a barrel of oil is for a very specific grade at a specific location.  The real prices vary depending on quality and location - maybe just like a CPU-hour should.  Rick   -----Original Message----- From: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com [mailto:cloud-computing@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim Houghton Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 9:16 AM To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Subject: FW: [ Cloud Computing ] Compute surface as a traded commodity?   Interesting thread ... I had discussions with executives at a large investment bank (one of the few still around today!) as far back as 2002 when we were implementing large grids for risk & portfolio analysis that leveraged 'scavenged' resources for some of the compute footprint.  I agree this will happen, but interoperability is not the only obstacle. Placing security off to the side - let's assume for the discussion someone has already overcome their technology or compliance hang-ups - there is a major business challenge to overcome.  We all know what an ounce of gold, or bushel of corn, or a barrel of oil is around the globe.  So what is the equivalent unit of trade for computing cycles?  Think before you answer ... 'CPU hour' just wants to jump off your tongue, but as we all know not all CPU's are created equal (even by the same manufacturer).  Then of course there's memory, bus speed, network bandwidth, network throughput, operating system, latency to/from your origination point, disk read/write speed ... I could go on and so can you. I've been living this for 6+ years working with clients who want to build internal utilities (clouds), and even there it's difficult to get agreement as this forms the basis for what they are going to get charged for the resources they consume.  It's not much of a 'utility' if users got a flat annual allocation charge, is it?  Yet that's by far the most common situation in large enterprises today.  There's the closet economist in me who feels (hopes) someone will just start such a market and soon thereafter the laws of supply and demand will set the appropriate prices.  Those with high quality service will be sold out and can increase their prices, with the reverse also true.  However, especially with the current state of global economic affairs, I am doubtful it will happen anytime soon.  Nor do I think we can count on any standards forum to tackle such an issue, and the major vendors will undoubtedly look at normalization (translate: commoditization) of their technologies as a bad thing.  Anyway, hopefully this provokes some thoughts - look forward to your responses.  Jim _________________ Jim Houghton CTO and Founder Adaptivity, Inc. (845) 494-9419  www.adaptivity.com  -----Original Message----- From: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com [mailto:] On Behalf Of Simon Plant Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 7:03 AM To: cloud-computing@googlegroups.com Subject: [ Cloud Computing ] Compute surface as a traded commodity?  Bruce wrote:   

Will the "Cloud" ever become a pool of hosting providers who pitch     

their prices, SLA's and storage cost so customers will come to their "cloud" for services?  I foresee a time into the future where the compute surface is virtualized and standardized enough that hosting contracts can be traded as a commodity on a market, rather than the RFP type process we have today.   Such agreement would allow business to place a deal on an exchange much like FX today and get bids to run based on some parameters.  IT hosters would price the deal with a spread in the same way as a currency trade today, the deal done in a matter of seconds and hosted for the duration of a contract window.  If virtualization vendors deliver on their hybrid end-vision, this could be a reality of packaging workloads with SLA manifests and using internet vMotion-type tools to migrate. It would fundamentally change the way we write software frameworks and applications themselves to be more self contained and highly standardized to achieve the best 'tradability'.   Interoperability via standards between VM platforms, portability of data, code business logic and processes are all key to how we build out the Cloud.   Such openness may be a far extreme view, but would you want the opposite view of the world where switching costs and lock-in are extremely constraining and we are forever stuck in a platform cycle of distribute-and-consolidate?   Simon Plant               

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cloud Computing" group.
To post to this group, send email to cloud-computing@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cloud-computing-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To post job listing, send email to jobs@cloudjobs.net (position title, employer and location in subject, description in message body) or visit http://www.cloudjobs.net
To submit your resume for cloud computing job bank, send it to resume@cloudjobs.net.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing?hl=en?hl=en
Posting guidelines:
http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing/web/frequently-asked-qu...
This group posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/
Group Members Meet up Calendar - http://groups.google.ca/group/cloud-computing/web/meet-up-calendar
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---