A Study on Fault Tolerance methods in Cloud

Computing

Amal Ganesh Dr. M.Sandhya Dr. Sharmila Shankar

Research Scholar Dept. Of Computer Science Dept. Of Computer Science
Dept. Of Computer Science B.S Abdur Rahman University B.S Abdur Rahman University
B.S Abdur Rahman University Chennai, India Chennai, India
Chennai, India sandhya@bsauniv.ac.in sharmilasankar@bsauniv.ac.in
amalganesh@gmail.com

Abstract—The emergence of Cloud Computing has brought new

dimension to the world of information technology. Even though
Cloud Computing provide various benefits like agility, on-
demand provisioning of resources, reduced cost, multi-tenancy
etc., there are risks and flaws associated with it. One key
research challenge in Cloud Computing is to ensure continuous
reliability and guaranteed availability of resources provided by
it. So there is a need for a robust Fault Tolerant (FT) system in
Cloud Computing. To better understand FT in Cloud
Computing, it is essential to understand the different types of
faults. In this paper, we highlight the basic concepts of fault
tolerance by understanding the different FT policies like Reactive
FT policy and Proactive FT policy and the associated FT
techniques used on different types of faults. A study on various
fault tolerant methods, algorithms, frameworks etc., has been
carried out which are developed and implemented by research
experts in this field. This is an area where lot of research is
happening and these studies will guide us to build a robust FT
technique in Cloud.

Keywords—Cloud Computing, Fault Tolerance.

Fig. 1. Overview of Cloud Computing

I. INTRODUCTION
The advent of Cloud Computing is considered to be the
single largest change in Information Technology. This change
has stimulated everyone, from individuals to community and
the large corporations. Now, the popularity of using Cloud are
widely accepted that organizations are moving their traditional
information processing systems to Cloud services for storing
large volumes of data.
A gold standard definition for Cloud Computing is provided
by National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.
According to NIST, “Cloud Computing is a model for enabling
convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of
configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers,
storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly
provisioned and released with minimal management effort or
service provider interaction.”
The Figure 1 provides an overview and the different
services provided by Cloud Computing. Based on the services
provided, Cloud is differentiated into Software as a Service
(SaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as a
Service (IaaS). In SaaS, Cloud providers develop, host and
operate domain specific applications which can be accessed by
the end users on a pay-as-you-go demand basis. In PaaS, the
platform is provided as service where application developers
can build application without any stress of managing or
buying large servers or underlying developing tools. And in
IaaS, infrastructure resources like operating system, storage,
processors and networking components are offered as service
where companies can deploy and run arbitrary software.
It is notable that Cloud Computing is not a new technology,
instead it brings together the existing technologies like
Virtualization and Utility-based pricing to perform an
operation in a more efficient and cost effective manner. The

978-1-4799-2572-8/14/$31.00 2014
c IEEE 844
benefits offered by Cloud Computing are immense that it has
brought a new dimension to provide services and resources to
its users.
A. Key Characteristics of Cloud Computing
• Improves agility as users can easily and
inexpensively facilitate technological resources.
• Reduce cost by converting capital expenditure to
operational expenditure. End users do not need to
purchase and manage hardware, servers etc.
• Can be accessed from any location using variety of
devices like smart phones, laptops, PCs etc. having
internet connectivity.
• Multi-tenancy enables users to share the resources
and cost among large pool of users allowing
increased peak capacity and efficient usage of under-
utilized resources.
• Provide scalability via on-demand provisioning of
resources on a real time basis.
Even though, Cloud Computing is a general trend in all
industries; there are issues in Cloud which need to be
addressed. One such issue is to ensure continuous reliability
and guaranteed availability of the services provided by Cloud
Computing. Although the services offered by Cloud are
beyond the traditional approach, benefits are always
accompanied with some risks & failures. For example,
Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) experienced failure
in Elastic Block Storage (EBS) drives and network
con¿guration, bringing down thousands of hosted applications
and websites for 24-72 hours [1].
Fig. 2. Different Layers in a Cloud
As shown in Figure 2, a single Cloud consists of different
layers which can be affected with various types of faults. So
these layers requires different levels of fault tolerant
techniques in order to provide seamless service. The failures
that occur in Cloud Computing can be classified into two
classes namely [2]:
2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC)
1) Data Failures: This type involves failures due to
corruption of data, missing source data and other flaws in the
data.
2) Computation Failures: It involves all types of hardware
or infrastructure failures like faulty or slow VMs, storage
access exception, etc.
Most of the applications hosted by the Cloud are real-time
High Performance Computing (HPC) systems which require
higher level of fault tolerance. According to studies conducted
by Schroeder and Gibson [3], most of the faults in Cloud
occur due to hardware failures mainly in processors, hard disk
drive, integrated circuit sockets, and memory. There are large
number of processors provisioned in Cloud. These processors
create virtual instances, communication links, integrated
circuit sockets etc. One way or another, these processors are
prone to failure. It has been predicted that a system with
1,00,000 processors will experience a processor failure every
few minutes [4]. Other than hardware faults, there are other
faults such as software faults causing application failure and
network faults due to server overload, network congestion etc.
which inhibits the communication between the Cloud and the
end users. So there is a need for having seasoned fault
tolerance method which manages faults in diverse aspects.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the
concepts of fault tolerance, Section III summarizes the related
works & draws analytical comparison among different FT
models, and finally Section IV presents the conclusion.
II. FAULT TOLERANCE – AN OVERVIEW
In a conventional system, Fault Tolerance (FT) deals with
quick repairing and replacement of faulty devices to retain the
system. Whereas in Cloud Computing, fault tolerance is the
ability of the Cloud to withstand the abrupt changes which
occur due to hardware faults, software faults, network
congestions etc.
In a Cloud network, fault management depends on two
important parameters namely Recovery Point Objective (RPO)
and Recovery Time Objective (RTO). The metric RPO defines
the amount of data to be lost during a fault or disaster whereas
RTO determines the minimum downtime for recovering from
faults. A healthy Cloud will have minimum value for both RPO
and RTO [5].
There are mainly two standard Fault Tolerant (FT) policies
available for real-time applications hosted in Cloud namely
Proactive Fault Tolerance Policy and Reactive Fault Tolerant
Policy. Based on these fault tolerant policies, various
techniques are used to provide fault tolerance.
A. Proactive Fault Tolerance
The principle of proactive fault tolerance policy is to avoid
failures by proactively taking preventative measures. These
measures are reserved by studying the pre-fault indicators and
845
predicting the underlying faults. The second step is to apply
proactive remedial measures at the development time by
changing the code or replacing the components which are
prone to failure. Proactive fault tolerance makes sure that the
job gets done completely without any reconfiguration.
Preemptive migration and Software Rejuvenation are two fault
tolerant techniques which are used based on proactive fault
tolerance policy [6].
1) Preemeptive Migration: It makes use of feedback-loop
control system where applications are constantly monitored
and analyzed.
2) Software Rejuvenation It is a technique in which
periodic reboots are scheduled for the system. After each
reboot, the system resumes with a clean state.
B. Reactive Fault Tolerance
Reactive fault tolerance policy deals with measures which
are applied to reduce the effect of the faults already occurred
in Cloud. Some of the fault tolerant techniques which are used
based on the reactive fault tolerance policy are
Checkpointing/Restart, Replication & Task Resubmission.
1) Checkpointing/Restart: When a failure occurs, the
applications can be restarted from the checkpoint prior to the
point of failure rather than rebooting from starting point. It is
an efficient fault tolerance technique for high computation-
intensive applications hosted in Cloud.
2) Replication: Replication is a popular fault tolerance
technique used based on reactive fault tolerance policy.
Replication in Cloud Computing is the process of keeping
multiple copies of data or object [7][8]. In a replication
technique, client requests for a copy from a set of replicas.
Different replicas run using different resources until the task is
completed or crashed. The tools like HAProxy, Hadoop and
AmazonEC2 can be used to provide replication in a Cloud.
One challenge of replication process is that it adds redundancy
in the system. Another task is to maintain consistency among
replica, replica management, degree of replication etc. A
replication protocol can be used to provide consistency
between the replicas of the same object. Consistency issue will
be raised when, only one of the replicas is updated by a user.
Also, as the number of replicas increase the cost of
maintaining the consistency also increases.
3) Task Resubmission: When a fault is detected, the task is
submitted either to the same or to a different resource at a
runtime without interrupting the workflow of the system [6].
Both proactive and reactive fault tolerance policies have
advantages and disadvantages. There are some experiment
results which clearly points out that migration technique
(proactive FT policy) are efficient than checkpoint/restart
technique (reactive FT policy). Even though proactive
846 2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC)
techniques are more efficient, they are not often used
compared to reactive techniques. This is because the system is
less affected by incorrect predictions due to proactive fault
tolerance and reactive methods are relatively simple to
implement as FT techniques are not applied during the
development time. On the other hand, reactive techniques may
not be suitable for systems which require higher availability of
VMs or clusters because once a failure occurs, availability
decreases dramatically.
III. RELATED WORK
Alain Tchana et al [9] propose a fault tolerance method in
which both the Cloud customers and providers will
collaboratively share their responsibilities in order to provide
the required fault tolerance. According to Tchana, application
faults can be detected and repaired at the customer level. But
the Virtual Machine (VM) and Hardware faults can be
detected & repaired at the Cloud provider level. The
recovery/restoration of the applications running on the
refurbished VMs can be requested and performed at the
customer level. Checkpointing technique is used to create
restore points for the recovered VMs.
Wenbing Zhao et al [10] put forward a Low Latency Fault
Tolerance (LLFT) middleware framework for fault tolerance
which replicates the processes of applications, using the
leader/follower replication approach. This framework is
equipped with a LLFT Messaging Protocol which ensures
reliable communication between the replicated processes.
LLFT Membership Protocol ensures that the entire replicated
process group has a consistent view of their membership.
Ravi Jhawar et al point out a method to exploit the
virtualisation layer to offer required fault tolerance properties
to the applications as an on-demand service. This is done by
adding a service layer which acts as a Fault Tolerance
Middleware (FTM) providing the required properties to
facilitate revamp support to its applications [1][11][12].
Sidirglou et al [13] discuss about Assure, an autonomous
fault management system in Cloud environment by
introducing rescue point technique. However, one potential
problem is that there is a chance that one of the major rescue
points will be called frequently during normal execution
creating higher overhead for server applications.
Shelp [14] is another autonomous FT system proposed by
Gang Chen et al which uses checkpointing as FT technique in
virtual environment.
Liying Wu et al [15] propose a Dynamic Data Fault-
Tolerance System for Cloud storage (DDFMCS). DDFMC
implement lightweight conversion of data using Hadoop and
the experimental result shows that DDFMCS can save the
storage space and helps to improve the performance of data
access. DDFMCS dynamically determines the various data for
fault tolerant mechanisms such as the file access frequency
ratio stored in the file access frequency table, the number of
file fault tolerance conversions and the time at which files are
stored in the system.
K. Ganga [6] et al discuss about the different fault tolerance
techniques in Cloud Computing and concentrates on how task
replication is done in Cloud Computing based on scientific
workflow.
In another paper, the behaviour and performance of the
hybrid Cloud is analyzed using Queuing Petri nets model by
Min Lu et al [16]. It can also be used to formulate a fault
tolerant strategy which recovers the virtual node failure
occurring at resource provision phase.
Naixue Xiong [17] et al talk about Self-tuning Fault
Detection system (SFD) which detects faults in Cloud
Computing. According to them, unlike other fault detecting
systems SFD can adjust fault detecting control parameters
which ensures better fault detection.
Jameela Al-Jaroodi [18] et al propose a delay-tolerant fault
tolerance algorithm which adapts failures by effectively
reducing execution time and thus minimizing the fault
discovery & recovery overhead in the Cloud. The algorithm
claims to be used efficiently in places like Cloud which
handles distributed tasks. According to them, the algorithm
ensures that data gets downloaded reliably from replicated
servers and efficiently executing applications on independent
multiple distributed servers in the Cloud.
Yilei Zhang [19] et al propose a BFTCloud, a Byzantine
Fault Tolerant framework for Cloud Computing. Replication
technique is used to provide the basic fault tolerance. In
addition to it, BFTCloud select voluntary nodes based on QoS
characteristics and reliability performance. According to
authors, their extensive experiments on various types of Cloud
environment shows that BFTCloud guarantees robustness of
systems when up to ݂ of totally 3݂ + 1 resource providers are
faulty, including crash faults, arbitrary behaviour faults, etc.
But Giuliana Santos Veronese [20] et al claim that it is
possible to reduce the number of replicas to 2f + 1 preserving
the same properties of traditional BFT algorithms. This is
achieved by using a simple trusted service which will reduce
the number of replicas, which in turn reduces the cost of
infrastructure in Cloud. Peter Garraghan [21] et al also discuss
about harnessing the potential and feasibility of Byzantine
fault tolerant system by developing a framework called FT-FC
and apply them to federated .
Yuesheng Tan [22] et al suggest a better fault tolerant
system compared to tradition Byzantine fault tolerant
algorithm. They developed a virtualization intrusion tolerance
system by adopting the method of hybrid fault model. This FT
model undergo active and passive replicas, updating the state
of the system, state transfer and proactive recovery. Their
results show that the system allows tolerating f faulty replicas
2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC)
in N=2f+1 replicas ensuring that only f+1 active replicas
execute during the intrusion-free stage. While the remaining
replicas are all put into passive mode. The traditional
Byzantine fault-tolerant algorithm tolerates f faulty replicas
require N = 3f +1 replicas.
In [23], Altino M. Sampaio et al discuss about two
algorithms namely; MTTE and RTTE algorithms which
dynamically map Virtual Machines (VMs) to Physical
Machines (PMs), subjected to PM failure. Their objective is to
reduce the faults by increasing the power efficiency in Cloud
Computing infrastructure with lower impact on the
performance required by the users. For a particular job
execution request, Minimum Time Task Execution algorithm
(MTTE) provides full access to resources and particular task
can access maximum necessary resources at minimum
necessary time for task completion. Whereas Relative Time
Task Execution (RTTE) uses Xen credit scheduler which
strictly reserve the necessary amount of resources required for
task completion within its deadline.
JiSu Park [24] et al concentrate on mobile Cloud
Computing and provide a monitoring technique towards fault
tolerance. In mobile Cloud Computing, mobile devices are
used as resource which is unstable as the state information
changes dynamically. Based on Markov Chain model, a
monitoring technique is created to collect the state
information. This state information is necessary to calculate
the reliability of fault tolerance in mobile Cloud Computing.
With this technique, it is possible to change monitoring time
interval dynamically.
Guisheng Fan et al [25] put forward a model based
Byzantine fault detection technique. In this technique, Cloud
Computing Fault Net (CFN) is created to model the different
components of Cloud Computing such as service resources,
detection and failure process etc. Petri net is used to create the
different components of Cloud Computing which gets
integrated dynamically into CFN model. Based on CFN model,
the properties of the components are analyzed developing a
fault detection strategy at each level which dynamically detects
the faults in the execution process.
Thanyalak Chalermarrewong [8] et al propose a fault
management framework which provide emphasis on hardware
fault tolerance. An ARMA model with a fault tree and fault
analysis technique is employed which act as proactive fault
tolerance techniques to predict the system failures. Based on
the prediction, the resource manager decides whether the
machine requires task migration to prevent possible fatalities.
In order to get accurate prediction results, the framework
includes a model adequacy checking function which can be
used to adjust the prediction model as required.
In another paper, Magdalena Slwainska et al [26] focus on
heterogeneity in Cloud Computing named Unibus. This paper
discuss on how to employ Unibus to orchestrate the resources
847

SI FT MODEL PROACTIVE REACTIVE PERFORMANCE
NO (Y/N) (Y/N)
1 LLFT N Y
2 FTM N Y
3 ASSURE Y N
4 SHelp N Y
5 SFD Y N
6 BFTCloud N Y
7 VFT Y Y
TABLE I. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FT MODELS
(Yes = Y, No = N, High = H, Low = L, Average = A)
and provide fault tolerance platform capable of executing
messages using Message Passing Interface (MPI). In order to
support fault tolerance in Unibus, a Distributed MultiThread
Checkpointing (DMTCP) is used which enables checkpointing
at the end user level.
Sheheryar Malik et al [27] propose a fault tolerance model
for real time Cloud Computing. In this model, the faults are
managed based on the reliability of processing nodes or virtual
machine. According to authors, the reliability of nodes
changes in every computational cycle. The proposed fault
tolerance model collects and analyses the performance or
reliability metrics of a particular virtual machine. If a
particular VM can produce the correct results within the
speculated time, that node or VM is considered to be worthy
node and its reliability increases. There is a minimum value
for reliability for which a particular node is to be considered
worthy or fault tolerable VM. And if a node fails to produce
the minimum result within the specified time, its reliability
decreases and the system undergoes backward recovery or
safety measure.
And finally, Pranesh Das et al [28] propose a Virtualization
and Fault Tolerance (VFT) technique by increasing the system
availability and reducing the service time. This reactive fault
tolerant technique consists of a Cloud Manager (CM) module
and a Decision Maker (DM) which are used to manage the
virtualization, load balancing and to handle the faults. The first
step involves virtualization & load balancing and in the second
step fault tolerance is achieved by redundancy, checkpointing
and fault handler. The virtualization includes a fault hander.
Not all the faults are recoverable. Fault handler finds these
unrecoverable faulty nodes and restricts these virtual nodes
from future requests or usage. It also helps to remove the
temporary software faults from recoverable nodes making them
available for future requests.
Based on some metrics obtained from these FT models, an
analytical comparison is done on some of the generally used
FT models. A certain number of parameters or FT properties
848 2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC)
FT PROPERTIES
RESPONSE TIME RELIABILTY
(H/L/A) (H/L/A) (H/L/A)
H A H
N A H
H A A
A H L
H A A
H A H
H H H
are used to analytically evaluate these FT models. Table I
illustrates the comparison among FT models based on these
parameters. The different parameters are:
1. Type of FT technique - which can be proactive or reactive.
2. Performance – checking the efficiency of the system.
3. Response Time – amount of time required to respond to a
particular procedure or algorithm. The value should be
minimum.
4. Reliability - which targets to give accurate results within a
real time environment.
IV. CONCLUSION
Over the past years, Cloud Computing has become a
popular computational technology across all industries. Cloud
brings forth vast advantages like providing access to large
amount of data & resources, on-demand service provisioning,
reduced cost of managing the infrastructure etc. making it
unique from other technologies. As the famous quote says,
with great power, comes great responsibility, Cloud Computing
with its immense benefits has to ensure continuous reliability
and guaranteed availability of the services provided. So there is
a need for an efficient fault tolerance method which shields the
Cloud from faults or failures. In this paper, we concentrate on
the standard fault tolerant concepts in Cloud Computing. Since
Cloud Computing is a new field of research compared to other
technologies, lot of research works are being carried out,
especially in developing a standalone fault tolerance method.
There are numerous FT methods proposed by the research
experts in this field. Our ultimate aim is to analyze these FT
methods, understand the limitations and to develop a FT
method which manages all type of faults in diverse aspects.
V. REFERENCES
[1] R. Jhawar, V. Piuri, and M. D. Santambrogio, "A comprehensive
conceptual system-level approach to fault tolerance in cloud
computing." In Systems Conference (SysCon), 2012 IEEE International,
pp. 1-5. IEEE, Mar 2012.
[2] J. Li, M. Humphrey, Y.W. Cheah, Y. Ryu, D. Agarwal, K. Jackson, and
C. van Ingen. "Fault tolerance and scaling in e-Science cloud
applications: observations from the continuing development of
MODISAzure." In e-Science (e-Science), 2010 IEEE 6th International
Conference on, pp. 246-253. IEEE, 2010
[3] B. Schroeder, and G. A. Gibson. "A large-scale study of failures in high-
performance computing systems." Dependable and Secure Computing,
IEEE Transactions on vol. 7, no.4, pp. 337-351, Oct 2010.
[4] I. P. Egwutuoha., S. Chen, D. Levy, and B. Selic, “A Fault Tolerance
Framework for High Performance Computing in Cloud.” In Cluster,
Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid), 2012 12th IEEE/ACM
International Symposium on pp. 709-710, May 2012.
[5] J. Panneerselvam, Lu Liu, R. Hill, Yongzhao Zhan, and Weining Liu.
"An Investigation of the Effect of Cloud Computing on Network
Management." In High Performance Computing and Communication &
2012 IEEE 9th International Conference on Embedded Software and
Systems (HPCC-ICESS), 2012 IEEE 14th International Conference on,
pp. 1794-1799. IEEE, 2012.
[6] K. Ganga., and S. Karthik. "A fault tolerent approach in scientific
workflow systems based on cloud computing." In Pattern Recognition,
Informatics and Medical Engineering (PRIME), 2013 International
Conference on, pp. 387-390. IEEE, 2013.
[7] I. Rodero, F. Guim, J. Corbalan, "Evaluation of coordinated Grid
scheduling strategies." In High Performance Computing and
Communications, 2009. HPCC'09. 11th IEEE International Conference
on, pp. 1-10. IEEE, 2009.
[8] T. Chalermarrewong, T. Achalakul, and S. C. W. See. "The design of a
fault management framework for cloud." In Electrical
Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and
Information Technology (ECTI-CON), 2012 9th International
Conference on, pp. 1-4. IEEE, 2012.
[9] A. Tchana, L. Broto, and D. Hagimont. "Approaches to cloud computing
fault tolerance." In Computer, Information and Telecommunication
Systems (CITS), 2012 International Conference on, pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2012.
[10] W. Zhao, P. M. Melliar-Smith, and L. E. Moser. "Fault tolerance
middleware for cloud computing." In Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2010
IEEE 3rd International Conference on, pp. 67-74. IEEE, 2010.
[11] R. Jhawar, V. Piuri, and M. D. Santambrogio, "Fault tolerance
management in IaaS clouds." In Satellite Telecommunications (ESTEL),
2012 IEEE 1st AESS European Conference on, pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2012.
[12] R. Jhawar, V. Piuri, and M. D. Santambrogio, "Fault Tolerance
Management in Cloud Computing: A System-Level Perspective,"
Systems Journal, IEEE , vol.7, no.2, pp.288-297, June 2013
[13] S. Sidiroglou, O. Laadan, C. Perez, N. Viennot, J. Nieh, and A. D.
Keromytis. "Assure: automatic software self-healing using rescue
points." In ACM Sigplan Notices vol. 44, no. 3, pp.37-48, 2009.
[14] G. Chen,, H. Jin, D. Zou, B. B. Zhou, W. Qiang, and G. Hu. "SHelp:
Automatic Self-healing for Multiple Application Instances in a Virtual
Machine Environment." In Cluster Computing (CLUSTER), 2010 IEEE
International Conference on, pp. 97-106. IEEE, 2010.
[15] L. Wu,, B. Liu, and W. Lin. "A Dynamic Data Fault-Tolerance
Mechanism for Cloud Storage." In Emerging Intelligent Data and Web
2014 IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC)
Technologies (EIDWT), 2013 4th International Conference on, pp. 95-
99. IEEE, 2013.
[16] M. Lu, and H. Yu. "A Fault Tolerant Strategy in Hybrid Cloud Based on
QPN Performance Model." In Information Science and Applications
(ICISA), 2013 International Conference on, pp. 1-7. IEEE, 2013.
[17] N. Xiong, A. V. Vasilakos, J. Wu, Y. R. Yang, A. Rindos, Y. Zhou, W.
Z. Song, and Y. Pan. "A self-tuning failure detection scheme for cloud
computing service." In Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium
(IPDPS), 2012 IEEE 26th International, pp. 668-679. IEEE, 2012.
[18] J. Al-Jaroodi, N. Mohamed, and K. Al Nuaimi. "An Efficient Fault-
Tolerant Algorithm for Distributed Cloud Services." In NCCA, pp. 1-
8.IEEE, 2012.
[19] Y. Zhang, Z. Zheng, and M. R. Lyu. "BFTCloud: A byzantine fault
tolerance framework for voluntary-resource cloud computing." In Cloud
Computing (CLOUD), 2011 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 444-
451. IEEE, 2011.
[20] G. S. Veronese, M. Correia, A. N. Bessani, L. C Lung; P. Verissimo,
"Efficient Byzantine Fault-Tolerance," Computers, IEEE Transactions
on , vol.62, no.1, pp.16,30.IEEE, Jan. 2013.
[21] P. Garraghan, P. Townend, and J. Xu. "Byzantine fault-tolerance in
federated cloud computing." In Service Oriented System Engineering
(SOSE), 2011 IEEE 6th International Symposium on, pp. 280-285.
IEEE, 2011.
[22] Y. Tan, D. Luo, and J. Wang. "Cc-vit: Virtualization intrusion tolerance
based on cloud computing." In Information Engineering and Computer
Science (ICIECS), 2010 2nd International Conference on, pp. 1-6. IEEE,
2010.
[23] A..M. Sampaio, J.G. Barbosa, "Dynamic Power- and Failure-Aware
Cloud Resources Allocation for Sets of Independent Tasks," Cloud
Engineering (IC2E), 2013 IEEE International Conference on , vol., no.,
pp.1,10, 25-27.IEEE, March 2013
[24] J. Park, H. C. Yu, K. S Chung, and E. Y. Lee. "Markov chain based
monitoring service for fault tolerance in mobile cloud computing." In
Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA), 2011
IEEE Workshops of International Conference on, pp. 520-525. IEEE,
2011.
[25] G. Fan, H. Yu, L. Chen, and D. Liu. "Model Based Byzantine Fault
Detection Technique for Cloud Computing." In Services Computing
Conference (APSCC), 2012 IEEE Asia-Pacific, pp. 249-256. IEEE,
2012.
[26] M. Slawinska, J. Slawinski, and V. Sunderam. "Unibus: Aspects of
heterogeneity and fault tolerance in cloud computing." In Parallel &
Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum (IPDPSW), 2010
IEEE International Symposium on, pp. 1-10. IEEE, 2010.
[27] S. Malik, and F. Huet. "Adaptive Fault Tolerance in Real Time Cloud
Computing." In Services (SERVICES), 2011 IEEE World Congress on,
pp. 280-287. IEEE, 2011.
[28] P. Das, and P. M. Khilar. "VFT: A virtualization and fault tolerance
approach for cloud computing." In Information & Communication
Technologies (ICT), 2013 IEEE Conference on, pp. 473-478. IEEE,
2013.
849