Instead of relying on huge and expensive data centers for rolling out cloudbased services to rural and remote areas, we propose a hardware platform based on small single-board computers. The role of these micro-data centers is twofold. On the one hand, they act as intermediaries between cloud services and clients, improving availability in the case of network or power outages. On the other hand, they run community-based services on local infrastructure. We illustrate how to build such a system without incurring high costs, high power consumption, or single points of failure. Additionally, we opt for a system that is extendable and scalable as well as easy to deploy, relying on an open design.
We agree with Hosman and Baikie @cite_10 that the Western bigger is better'' approach for building large-scale data centers is bound to fail in developing countries, due to the particular constraints. Furthermore, in a study Hosman identifies the main challenges faced by hardware deployers in these regions @cite_20 : energy consumption, cost, environment-related issues, connectivity, and maintenance and support. These are all crucial aspects we cover by relying on inexpensive, low-power, rugged platforms, such as micro-computers, to build micro-data centers. This approach is also indicated in @cite_20 @cite_10 . There are various groups already working on developing Raspberry Pi clusters and similar architectures @cite_24 @cite_16 , the challenge is to adapt these designs to the conditions found in developing countries.
@cite_24 @cite_16 @cite_10 @cite_20
2050184734 2199558228 2118955868 2038337218
In the developing world, reliable and affordable electricity isn't always available, presenting challenges for the Western "bigger is better" datacenter model. A small-scale, cloud computing datacenter, however, could leverage recent technological breakthroughs to instead rely on solar energy. The continuous increase in volume, variety and velocity of Big Data exposes datacenter resource scaling to an energy utilization problem. Traditionally, datacenters employ x86-64 (big) server nodes with power usage of tens to hundreds of Watts. But lately, low-power (small) systems originally developed for mobile devices have seen significant improvements in performance. These improvements could lead to the adoption of such small systems in servers, as announced by major industry players. In this context, we systematically conduct a performance study of Big Data execution on small nodes in comparison with traditional big nodes, and present insights that would be useful for future development. We run Hadoop MapReduce, MySQL and in-memory Shark workloads on clusters of ARM big. LITTLE boards and Intel Xeon server systems. We evaluate execution time, energy usage and total cost of running the workloads on self-hosted ARM and Xeon nodes. Our study shows that there is no one size fits all rule for judging the efficiency of executing Big Data workloads on small and big nodes. But small memory size, low memory and I O bandwidths, and software immaturity concur in canceling the lower-power advantage of ARM servers. We show that I O-intensive MapReduce workloads are more energy-efficient to run on Xeon nodes. In contrast, database query processing is always more energy-efficient on ARM servers, at the cost of slightly lower throughput. With minor software modifications, CPU-intensive MapReduce workloads are almost four times cheaper to execute on ARM servers. Large-scale Internet services require a computing infrastructure that can beappropriately described as a warehouse-sized computing system. The cost ofbuilding datacenter facilities capable of delivering a given power capacity tosuch a computer can rival the recurring energy consumption costs themselves.Therefore, there are strong economic incentives to operate facilities as closeas possible to maximum capacity, so that the non-recurring facility costs canbe best amortized. That is difficult to achieve in practice because ofuncertainties in equipment power ratings and because power consumption tends tovary significantly with the actual computing activity. Effective powerprovisioning strategies are needed to determine how much computing equipmentcan be safely and efficiently hosted within a given power budget. In this paper we present the aggregate power usage characteristics of largecollections of servers (up to 15 thousand) for different classes ofapplications over a period of approximately six months. Those observationsallow us to evaluate opportunities for maximizing the use of the deployed powercapacity of datacenters, and assess the risks of over-subscribing it. We findthat even in well-tuned applications there is a noticeable gap (7 - 16 )between achieved and theoretical aggregate peak power usage at the clusterlevel (thousands of servers). The gap grows to almost 40 in wholedatacenters. This headroom can be used to deploy additional compute equipmentwithin the same power budget with minimal risk of exceeding it. We use ourmodeling framework to estimate the potential of power management schemes toreduce peak power and energy usage. We find that the opportunities for powerand energy savings are significant, but greater at the cluster-level (thousandsof servers) than at the rack-level (tens). Finally we argue that systems needto be power efficient across the activity range, and not only at peakperformance levels. Power delivery, electricity consumption, and heat management are becoming key challenges in data center environments. Several past solutions have individually evaluated different techniques to address separate aspects of this problem, in hardware and software, and at local and global levels. Unfortunately, there has been no corresponding work on coordinating all these solutions. In the absence of such coordination, these solutions are likely to interfere with one another, in unpredictable (and potentially dangerous) ways. This paper seeks to address this problem. We make two key contributions. First, we propose and validate a power management solution that coordinates different individual approaches. Using simulations based on 180 server traces from nine different real-world enterprises, we demonstrate the correctness, stability, and efficiency advantages of our solution. Second, using our unified architecture as the base, we perform a detailed quantitative sensitivity analysis and draw conclusions about the impact of different architectures, implementations, workloads, and system design choices.