Comparing to Availability-Based Provisioning Sample Clauses

Comparing to Availability-Based Provisioning. We first compare our SLA-based provisioning algorithm to the availability-based approach. Figure 3 shows the admittance rate for each algorithm. For low load (10-30 Erlangs), our SLA-based algorithm admits approximately 1.5 times as many requests as the availability-based approach. Similarly, Figure 4 shows that our algorithm satisfies at least 1.5 times as many requests as the competing algorithm. Figure 5 shows that though our algorithm admits significantly more requests than the competing algorithm, it is still able to satisfy a higher percentage of the availability requirements of the requests that it admits. The expected profits acquired by each algorithm are shown in Figure 6. Our algorithm achieves significantly more profit than the previous algorithm (more than twice as much 2Load, measured in Erlangs, is defined as the product of the connection arrival rate, the average connection-holding time, and a connection’s average bandwidth normalized to units of OC-192. to accommodate as many customers as possible, at the risk of violating several SLAs, may choose this policy. In the Admit-Most scheme, requests that are likely to be profitable are admitted and less profitable requests are rejected. An SP whose goal is to accommodate many customers while achieving high customer satisfaction by providing typically reliable service, may choose this moderately aggressive ad- mission policy. Admit-Most is the approach we took for our simulation results in Section V-A. ***Revised (threshold values)*** For our simulations, we used a fixed threshold value and admitted the requests that yielded a profit higher than this threshold. A useful feature of our approach is that SP’s can tune this threshold according to their preferences. Finally, in the Admit-Few scheme, a request is admitted only if its satisfaction probability is higher than a predefined threshold (as in the Admit-Most scheme, SP’s can tune this threshold value). An SP whose goal is to always provide highly reliable service may choose this policy. ***Revised added*** The choice for the admission control scheme may also depend on the urgency levels of requests. For example, SPs who service hospitals or other medical institutions may choose the Admit-Few scheme to ensure that all of their connections will be very reliable. On the other hand, SPs who provide less urgent services may find that the more flexible Admit-All or Admit-Most scheme is a better fit for their needs. Figures 7-8 show that the Admit-F...