A Comparative Study of a Client Based Vendor Neutral Cloud QoS Monitoring Tool and Cloud Providers’ Platform Integrated QoS Monitoring Tools
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Cloud service providers have a QoS monitoring capability integrated in their cloud platforms. This is to aid in monitoring the performance of the platform as well as for Service Level Agreement confirmation to the clients. Unfortunately this arrangement serves the interest of the cloud provider more than the cloud client since the service providers gauge their services using their own tools. This paper performs a comparative study on the capabilities of the client based vendor neutral QoS tool, developed from a vendor neutral QoS monitoring model against the cloud provider integrated QoS monitoring tools. The comparison was done on four global SaaS cloud service providers, namely SalesForce, Google, Hubspot and Shopify. From the comparative study, it emerged that the client based vendor neutral tool has more capabilities than the cloud provider integrated tools since it has the capability to monitor three key QoS metrics, namely service response time, service availability and service stability as opposed to the cloud providers’ tools which only have one quantitative capability. Further the vendor neutral model can be used across any cloud platform that is accessible via the web browser. This provides a capability for cross platform performance comparison for the various cloud providers. This can aid in decision making with regards to which cloud service provider to procure based on the desired performance.
Downloads
References
-
C. Uikey and D. S. Bhilare, ?A Broker Based Trust Model for Cloud Computing Environment,? International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 3, Issue 11, November 2013.
Google Scholar
1
-
A. S. A. Hussam , H. A. Mohammed, and M. K. Laith, F. B. Z. Mohamad and A. A. Yazan, ?A Review of Challenges and Security Risks of Cloud Computing.,? Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 1-2, 2017.
Google Scholar
2
-
M. H. Mamoun and E. M. Ibrahim, ?A Proposed Framework for Ranking and Reservation of Cloud Services,? International Journal of Engineering and Technology, Volume 4, No. 9, 2014.
Google Scholar
3
-
K. M. Muchahari and K. S. Sinha, ?A New Trust Management Architecture for Cloud Computing Environment, International Symposium on Cloud and Services Computing,? pp. 136-140, Mangalore, 2012.
Google Scholar
4
-
S. M. Habib, S. Ries and M. Muhlhauser , ?Cloud computing Landscape and Research Challenges Regarding Trust and Reputation?, in Proceedings of the 2010 Symposia and Workshops on Ubiquitous, Autonomic and Trusted Computing. IEEE Computer Society, 2010, pp. 410?415.
Google Scholar
5
-
S. Banerjee and S. Jain, ?A survey on Software as a service (SaaS) using quality model in cloud computing?. International Journal Of Engineering And Computer Science ISSN:2319-7242 Volume 3 Issue 1, 2014.
Google Scholar
6
-
A. Sleit, N. Misk, F. Badwan and T. Khalil, ?Cloud Computing Challenges With Emphasis On Amazon Ec2 And Windows Azure?, International Journal of Computer Networks & Communications (IJCNC) Vol.5, No.5, September 2013.
Google Scholar
7
-
B. A. Khatibi and S. M. Hashemi, ?QoS Metrics for Cloud Computing Services Evaluation?, International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications. Volume 6, 2014.
Google Scholar
8
-
M. A. Serhani and A. Yacine,?Towards an adaptive QoS-driven monitoring of cloud SaaS?, Int. J. Grid and Utility Computing, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014.
Google Scholar
9
-
D. Ardagna, G. Casale, M. Ciavotta, J.F. Pe?rez and W. Wang, ?Quality-of-service in cloud computing: modeling techniques and their applications,? Journal of Internet Services and Applications Volume 5, Issue 1, 2014.
Google Scholar
10
-
N. Zanoon, ?Toward Cloud Computing: Security And Performance?, International Journal on Cloud Computing: Services and Architecture (IJCCSA) ,Vol. 5,No. 5/6, 2015.
Google Scholar
11
-
A. A. Dhari and I. A. Khaldun , ?An Efficient Load Balancing Scheme for Cloud Computing?, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 10(11), 2017.
Google Scholar
12
-
R. Shinmonski Windows 2000 & Windows Server 2003 Clustering and Load balancing . Emeryville. McGraw-Hill professional publishing, CA, USA (2003), p2.
Google Scholar
13
-
A. Aggarwal and S. Malhotra, ?Cloud Computing: Performance Implications and Challenges?, Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology Cloud and Distributed, Volume 13, issue 1, 2013.
Google Scholar
14
-
F. Makokha and E. Opiyo, ? A Vendor Neutral QoS Monitoring Model for SaaS Cloud Computing Solutions?, International Journal of Computer and Information Technology (ISSN: 2279 ? 0764) Volume 7? Issue 01, January 2018.
Google Scholar
15
-
N. Thio and S. Karunasekera, ?Automatic measurement of a QoS metric for web service recommendation,?, in Proceedings of Australian Software Engineering Conference, Brisbane, Queensland, 2005, pp. 202?211.
Google Scholar
16
-
F. Makokha, E. E. Opiyo and C. K. Chepken, ?Browser Integrated Vendor Neutral Cloud QoS Monitoring System?, International Journal of Computer and Information Technology Volume 08 ? Issue 06, November 2019.
Google Scholar
17
-
M. Godse and S. Mulik , ?An approach for selecting Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) product ?, in Cloud 2009 - 2009 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, Bangalore, India ,pp. 155?158, 2009.
Google Scholar
18
-
N. Upadhyay, ?Managing Cloud Service Evaluation and Selection?, Procedia Computer Science , Volume 122 ,1061?1068, 2017.
Google Scholar
19
-
M. Kesavulu, M. Helfert and M. Bezbradica , ?An Overview of User-level Usage Monitoring in Cloud Environment.?, In 23rd UK Academy for Information Systems International Conference (UKAIS), At University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2018.
Google Scholar
20
-
A. Khalid, R. Rajiv, K. Mitra, F. Rabhi, S. U. Khan, A. Guabtni, B. Vasudha, ?An overview of the commercial cloud monitoring tools: research dimensions, design issues, and state-of-the-art?, Computing 97, 357?377, 2015.
Google Scholar
21
-
N. V. Krunal, J. T. Paresh and M. L. Amit , ? Job Scheduling Heuristics and Simulation Tools in Cloud Computing Environment: A Survey?, International Journal of Advanced Networking and Applications, Volume: 10 Issue: 02 Pages: 3782- 3787, 2018.
Google Scholar
22
-
A. L. Asif, H. Hui, A. H. Imtiaz, M. M Sulleman and P. Sajida, ?Analysis of Quality of Experience Frameworks for Cloud Computing?, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, Volume.17 No.12, 2017.
Google Scholar
23
-
E. Azubuike, D. Olawande and A. Matthew, ?QoS-based ranking and selection of SaaS applications using heterogeneous similarity metrics?, Journal of Cloud Computing: Advances, Systems and Applications 7:15, 2018.
Google Scholar
24
-
S. Amaresan (online) ?The Top 30 SaaS Companies & Products to Watch in 2019?, https://blog.hubspot.com/service/top-saas-companies accessed on 9th December 2019.
Google Scholar
25
-
P. Jadhav , P. Lohangade, S. Jangam and T. Chavan, ?Cloud Computing : Platform and Applications ?, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Reseach and Science(IJAERS), Volume 3, Issue 12, 2016.
Google Scholar
26
-
P. X. Wen and L. Dong, ? Quality Model for Evaluating SaaS Service, 2013?, in Fourth International Conference on Emerging Intelligent Data and Web Technologies , Xi'an, Shaanxi, China, September 9-11, 2013. IEEE Computer Society 2013, ISBN 978-0-7695-5044-2.
Google Scholar
27
-
A. Khanjani, N. R. Wan, A. G. Abdul and B. S. Abu ,? Saas Quality of Service Attributes?, Journal of Applied Sciences, Volume: 14 , Issue: 24, 2014.
Google Scholar
28
Most read articles by the same author(s)
-
Jonah Kenei,
Elisha Opiyo,
Robert Oboko,
Visualizing Semantic Structure of a Clinical Text Document , European Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science: Vol. 4 No. 6 (2020) -
Frankline Makokha,
Vote Validation using Blockchain Technology: A Conceptual Use Case , European Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science: Vol. 4 No. 4 (2020)