Table 2.
Extensive comparative analysis of proposed Vs. existing frameworks.
| Algorithm Name | Selection Policy | Allocation Policy | Nodes | VM’s | Power/Energy Consumption (KWh) | Execution time (sec) | Number of node shutdowns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IQR MMT | Minimum Migration Time | Inter Quartile Range | 50 | 100 | 47.85 | 0.002510 | 1549 |
| IQR MU | Minimum Utilization | Inter Quartile Range | 50 | 100 | 49.32 | 0.003100 | 1622 |
| LR MMT | Minimum Migration Time | Local Regression | 50 | 100 | 35.37 | 0.001680 | 806 |
| LR MU | Minimum Utilization | Local Regression | 50 | 100 | 35.38 | 0.001530 | 816 |
| MAD MMT | Minimum Migration Time | Median Absolute Deviation | 50 | 100 | 45.61 | 0.003310 | 1528 |
| MAD MU | Minimum Utilization | Median Absolute Deviation | 50 | 100 | 47.36 | 0.014710 | 1632 |
| THR MMT | Minimum Migration Time | Static Threshold | 50 | 100 | 41.81 | 0.001330 | 1424 |
| THR MU | Minimum Utilization | Static Threshold | 50 | 100 | 44.08 | 0.001600 | 1578 |
| ESLB | Energy Sensitive | Load Balancing | 50 | 100 | 36.81 | 0.001560 | 795 |