IBMSkip to main content
  Home     Products & services     Support & downloads     My account  
  Select a country 
Journals Home 
 Systems Journal 
 ·  Current Issue 
 ·  Recent Issues 
 ·  Papers in Progress 
 ·  Search/Index 
 ·  Orders 
 ·  Description 
 ·  Author's Guide 
Journal of Research
and Development
 Staff 
 Contact Us 
 Related links: 
  Autonomic Computing 
  IBM AC Research 
  IBM eServer and AC 
IBM Systems Journal 
Volume 42, Number 1, 2003
Autonomic Computing
 Table of contents: arrowHTML arrowPDF   This article: arrowHTML arrowPDF arrowCopyright info
  

The dawning of the autonomic computing era - References
by A. G. Ganek and T. A. Corbi

Cited references and notes

  1. P. Horn, Autonomic Computing: IBM's Perspective on the State of Information Technology, IBM Corporation (October 15, 2001); available at http://www.research.ibm.com/autonomic/manifesto/autonomic_computing.pdf.
  2. IBM Server Group, eLiza: Building an Intelligent Infrastructure for E-business—Technology for a Self-Managing Server Environment, G520-9592-00, IBM Corporation (2001); also at http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/introducing/eliza/eliza_final.pdf.
  3. For more than 30 years, Moore's Law has forecasted progress in the computing industry like an immutable force of nature. In 1965, Gordon E. Moore, then the director of research and development at Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, made the casual observation that processing power will double every 18 to 24 months, suggesting healthy growth ahead over the next decade for the then-nascent silicon chip industry. Five years later, Moore cofounded Intel Corporation, and “Moore's law” was well on its way to becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy among researchers and developers in the industry.
  4. A petabyte (PB) is 1000 terabytes, and a terabyte is 1000 gigabytes. CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research located just outside of Geneva, Switzerland, has started building a 100-PB archive to house data from the particle accelerator of the research center. See “From Kilobytes to Petabytes in 50 Years,” Science and Technology Review, UCRL-52000-02-4, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA (April 15, 2002), http://www.llnl.gov/str/March02/March50th.html.
  5. The term “autonomic computing” comes from an analogy to the autonomic central nervous system in the human body, which adjusts to many situations without any external help. “Autonomic” is defined as: (a) Of, relating to, or controlled by the autonomic nervous system; (b) Acting, or occurring involuntarily; automatic; an autonomic reflex.
  6. F. P. Brooks, Jr., The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering, Twentieth Anniversary Edition, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA (1995), p. 226. See also, F. P. Brooks, Jr., “No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering,” Computer 20, No. 4, 10–19 (1987).
  7. D. A. Patterson, A. Brown, P. Broadwell, G. Candea, M. Chen, J. Cutler, P. Enriquez, A. Fox, E. Kiciman, M. Merzbacher, D. Oppenheimer, N. Sastry, W. Tetzlaff, J. Traupman, N. Treuhaft, Recovery-Oriented Computing (ROC): Motivation, Definition, Techniques, and Case Studies, U.C. Berkeley Computer Science Technical Report, UCB//CSD-02-1175, University of California, Berkeley (March 15, 2002).
  8. K. Evans-Correia, “Simplifying Storage Management Starts with More Efficient System Utilization,” Interview with N. Tabellion, searchStorage (August 29, 2001), see http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/qna/0,289202,sid5_gci764063,00.html.
  9. IBM Data Management Tools: New Opportunities for Cost-Effective Administration, Profile Report, Aberdeen Group, Inc., Boston (April 2002), p. 3.
  10. D. Patterson, “Availability and Maintainability >> Performance: New Focus for a New Century,” USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST '02), Keynote Address, Monterey, CA (January 29, 2002).
  11. A. Brown and D. A. Patterson, “To Err Is Human,” Proceedings of the First Workshop on Evaluating and Architecting System dependabilitY (EASY '01), Goeteborg, Sweden (July 2001).
  12. “How Much Is an Hour of Downtime Worth to You?” from Must-Know Business Continuity Strategies, Yankee Group, Boston (July 31, 2002).
  13. D. J. Clancy, “NASA Challenges in Autonomic Computing,” Almaden Institute 2002, IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA (April 10, 2002).
  14. Merit Project, Computer Associates International, http://www.meritproject.com/it_survey_results.htm.
  15. I. Wladawsky-Berger, “Advancing E-business into the Future: The Grid,” Kennedy Consulting Summit 2001, New York (November 29, 2001).
  16. In this context, a Service Level Agreement (SLA) is a compact between a customer or consumer and a provider of an IT service that specifies the levels of availability, serviceability, performance (and tracking/reporting), problem management, security, operation, or other attributes of the service, often established via negotiation. Typically, an SLA identifies and defines the customer's needs, provides a framework for discussion and understanding, attempts to simplify complex requirements, outlines methods for resolving disputes, and helps eliminate unrealistic expectations.
  17. “`Bluefin' A Common Interface for SAN Management,” White Paper, Storage Networking Industry Association (August 13, 2002), http://www.snia.org/tech_activities/SMI/bluefin/Bluefin_White_Paper_v081302.pdf from http://www.snia.org/tech_activities/SMI/bluefin/.
  18. Application Response Measurement Issue 3.0 Java Binding, Open Group Technical Standard CO14, The Open Group (October 2001), at http://www.opengroup.org/products/publications/catalog/c014.htm.
  19. Common Information Model (CIM) Specification Version 2.2, DSP0004, Distributed Management Task Force (June 14, 1999), at http://www.dmtf.org/standards/standard_cim.php.
  20. Web Services Toolkit, alphaWorks, IBM Corporation (July 26, 2000), http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/webservicestoolkit.
  21. The control loop is the essence of automation. By measuring or sensing some activity in a process to be controlled, a controller component decides what needs to be done next and executes the required operations through a set of actuators. The controller then remeasures the process to determine whether the actions of the actuator had the desired effect. The whole routine is then repeated in a continuous loop of measure, decide, actuate, and repeat.
  22. The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure, I. Foster and C. Kesselman, Editors, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, CA (1999).
  23. See http://www.globus.org, the home of the Globus Project, the Globus Toolkit (GT3), and work related to the Open Grid Services Architecture (OGSA).
  24. I. Foster, C. Kesselman, and S. Tuecke, “The Anatomy of the Grid: Enabling Scalable Virtual Organizations,” International Journal of High Performance Computing 15, No. 3, 200–222 (2001); see also, http://www.globus.org/research/papers/anatomy.pdf.
  25. Global Grid Forum, http://www.gridforum.org/.
  26. MDS 2.2 User's Guide, The Globus Project, available at www.globus.org/mds/mdsusersguide.pdf.
  27. Internet Engineering Task Force, http://www.ietf.org.
  28. Distributed Management Task Force, http://www.dmtf.org.
  29. National Institute of Standards and Technology, http://www.nist.gov.
  30. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards, http://www.oasis-open.org.
  31. L. Lymberopoulos, E. Lupu, and M. Sloman, “An Adaptive Policy Based Management Framework for Differentiated Services Networks,” Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (Policy 2002), Monterey, CA (June 2002), pp. 147–158.
  32. V. Sander, W. A. Adamson, I. Foster, and A. Roy, “End-to-End Provision of Policy Information for Network QoS,” Proceedings of the Tenth IEEE Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing (HPDC-10), IEEE Press (August 2001).
  33. D. C. Verma, S. Sahu, S. Calo, A. Shaikh, I. Chang, and A. Acharya, “SRIRAM: A Scalable Resilient Autonomic Mesh,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 19–28 (2003, this issue).
  34. J. Jann, L. A. Browning, and R. S. Burugula, “Dynamic Reconfiguration: Basic Building Blocks for Autonomic Computing on IBM pSeries Servers,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 29–37 (2003, this issue).
  35. D. A. Norman, A. Ortony, and D. M. Russell, “Affect and Machine Design: Lessons for the Development of Autonomous Machines,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 38–44 (2003, this issue).
  36. K. Whisnant, Z. T. Kalbarczyk, and R. K. Iyer, “A System Model for Dynamically Reconfigurable Software,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 45–59 (2003, this issue).
  37. J. Appavoo, K. Hui, C. A. N. Soules, R. W. Wisniewski, D. M. Da Silva, O. Krieger, M. A. Auslander, D. J. Edelsohn, B. Gamsa, G. R. Ganger, P. McKenney, M. Ostrowski, B. Rosenburg, M. Stumm, and J. Xenidis, “Enabling Autonomic Behavior in Systems Software with Hot Swapping,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 60–76 (2003, this issue).
  38. L. W. Russell, S. P. Morgan, and E. G. Chron, “Clockwork: A New Movement in Autonomic Systems,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 77–84 (2003, this issue).
  39. D. M. Yellin, “Competitive Algorithms for the Dynamic Selection of Component Implementations,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 85–97 (2003, this issue).
  40. V. Markl, G. M. Lohman, and V. Raman, “LEO: An Autonomic Query Optimizer for DB2,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 98–106 (2003, this issue).
  41. D. M. Chess, C. C. Palmer, and S. R. White, “Security in an Autonomic Computing Environment,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 107–118 (2003, this issue).
  42. G. Lanfranchi, P. Della Peruta, A. Perrone, and D. Calvanese, “Toward a New Landscape of Systems Management in an Autonomic Computing Environment,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 119–128 (2003, this issue).
  43. R. Want, T. Pering, and D. Tennenhouse, “Comparing Autonomic and Proactive Computing,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 129–135 (2003, this issue).
  44. Y. Diao, J. L. Hellerstein, S. Parekh, and J. P. Bigus, “Managing Web Server Performance with AutoTune Agents,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 136–149 (2003, this issue).
  45. R. Haas, P. Droz, and B. Stiller, “Autonomic Service Deployment in Networks,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 150–164 (2003, this issue).
  46. D. F. Bantz, C. Bisdikian, C. Challener, J. P. Karidis, S. Mastrianni, A. Mohindra, D. G. Shea, and M. Vanover, “Autonomic Personal Computing,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 165–176 (2003, this issue).
  47. D. M. Russell, P. P. Maglio, R. Dordick, and C. Neti, “Dealing with Ghosts: Managing the User Experience of Autonomic Computing,” IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 177–188 (2003, this issue).
  48. A. Abbondanzio, Y. Aridor, O. Biran, L. L. Fong, G. S. Goldszmidt, R. E. Harper, S. M. Krishnakumar, G. Pruett, and B.-A. Yassur, “Management of Application Complexes in Multitier Clustered Systems,” Technical Forum, IBM Systems Journal 42, No. 1, 189–195 (2003, this issue).
  49. J. Hennessy, “Back to the Future: Time to Return to Some Long-Standing Problems in Computer Science,” Almaden10 Institute 2002, IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA (April 10, 2002).
About IBM | Privacy | Terms of use | Contact