Cloud Service Component Selection for Deadline and Cost Constraints

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional methods for executing program operations on cloud-based services fail to provide multi-criteria optimization, leading to mismanaged resources, increased costs, and inefficiencies due to the inability to efficiently allocate computational and storage resources based on user constraints and service provider availability.

Innovation Solution

A method involving a machine learning algorithm that identifies optimal service component combinations by considering user constraints such as deadlines and budgets, and service provider constraints like resource availability, to execute program operations efficiently.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If high-end GPU is used to meet deadline, then program operation completes within time constraint, but cost increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining timeVSAvoidcomputational cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts service component parameters (GPU type, storage capacity, network bandwidth) based on user constraints and real-time status to optimize the trade-off between training time and computational cost. The machine learning algorithm evaluates multiple parameter combinations to select the most cost-effective configuration that meets the deadline.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors the status of service components and dynamically reassigns tasks to available resources. When high-end GPUs become available, they are allocated to time-sensitive tasks; when lower-performance resources are available, they are assigned to less time-critical operations, creating a dynamic optimization system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Quantity of substance

If excessive storage space is allocated, then data storage capacity is sufficient, but resource waste increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestorage capacityVSAvoidunused storage
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system adjusts storage capacity parameters dynamically based on the actual data size and user needs. The machine learning algorithm analyzes storage requirements and selects the minimum necessary storage capacity from available options, preventing over-provisioning while ensuring sufficient space for the workload.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If service components are over-provisioned, then system capacity is sufficient, but resource allocation efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservice availabilityVSAvoidresource utilization
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements dynamic resource allocation where service components are provisioned based on real-time demand and user constraints. The machine learning algorithm continuously evaluates system state and adjusts resource allocation to maintain service reliability while maximizing utilization, assigning resources to multiple customers based on availability and need.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system makes service components multi-functional by allocating the same resources to multiple different customers and workloads based on real-time requirements. A single GPU or storage unit can serve multiple customers sequentially or in parallel, increasing overall system productivity while maintaining service quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Ease of operation

If conventional scheduling methods are used, then implementation is simple, but multi-criteria optimization is not achieved

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling simplicityVSAvoidexecution efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs a machine learning algorithm that autonomously optimizes service component allocation based on user constraints and system state. The algorithm self-adjusts scheduling decisions to achieve multi-criteria optimization across cost, time, and resource utilization without requiring complex user configuration or manual intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS12386674B2Systems and methods for optimized execution of program operations on cloud-based services
Publication Date: 2025.08.12 ACRONIS INT
  • US12386674B2 patent drawing
  • US12386674B2 patent drawing
  • US12386674B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Disclosed herein are systems and method efficiently executing a program operation on a cloud-based service. In an exemplary aspect, a method comprises receiving a request to perform a program operation on a cloud-based service and at least one user constraint for performing the program operation, and determining a plurality of sub-operations that are comprised in the program operation. The method comprises identifying a plurality of service component combinations offered by the service provider that can execute the program operation, and identifying at least one processing constraint of each service component. The method comprises determining a service component combination from the plurality of service component combinations for executing the program operation based on the at least one user constraint and processing constraints. The method comprises executing the program operation by the determined service component combination.