跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1164新增论文
+869其中 AI 相关
+88已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 05:59 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 06:10 — 2026-11-06 06:10(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-06 05:59最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-06 05:57(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.35564

A Unified Queueing-Based Framework for Comparative Evaluation of Serverless Autoscaling Strategies under Bursty Workloads

Zahra Zafarzade, Ehsan Ataie

Serverless computing platforms must preserve quality of service (QoS) while adapting to highly bursty and unpredictable workloads. To cope with workload fluctuations while satisfying QoS requirements and service-level agreements (SLAs), these platforms rely on automatic resource scaling. Commercial function-as-a-service (FaaS) platforms employ different autoscaling strategies to dynamically adjust the number of active function instances and the available processing capacity. In this work, three representative autoscaling strategies are modeled and compared: scale-per-request (SPR), concurrencylevel scaling (CLS), and metric-based scaling (MBS). To enable systematic evaluation independent of proprietary platform-specific implementations, we develop a unified modeling framework that combines analytical queueing network (QN) modeling with queueing Petri nets (QPN) implemented in Java Modeling Tools (JMT) to evaluate autoscaling behavior under two-phase hyper-exponential (H2) arrivals. Evaluation is conducted using four system-level metrics: throughput, mean response time, system population, and system power. The framework captures dynamic function instance (FI) activation, concurrency constraints, and queue buildup under saturation. Comparative analysis reveals a clear trade-off between peak performance and stability: SPR provides the lowest delay under moderate load but becomes fragile near capacity limits; CLS is governed by concurrency tokens and is highly sensitive to configuration under bursty conditions; whereas MBS provides the most stable QoS across the workload range by keeping utilization below a critical region and preventing explosive queue growth under critical load.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.DC
arXiv ↗PDF ↗