Abstract
We have developed a formal performance model for centralized and replicated architectures involving two users, giving equations for response, feedthrough, and task completion times. The model explains previous empirical results by showing that (a) low network latency favors the centralized architecture and (b) asymmetric processing powers favor the centralized architecture. In addition, it makes several new predictions, showing that under certain practical conditions, (a) centralizing the application on the slower machine may be the optimal solution, (b) centralizing the application on the faster machine is sometimes better than replicating, and (c) as the duration of the collaboration increases, the difference in performances of centralized and replicated architectures gets magnified. We have verified these predictions through new experiments for which we created synthesized logs based on parameters gathered from actual collaboration logs. Our results increase the understanding of centralized and replicated architectures and can be used by (a) users of adaptive systems to decide when to perform architecture changes, (b) users who have a choice of systems with different architectures to choose the system most suited for a particular collaboration mode (defined by the values of the collaboration parameters), and (c) users locked into a specific architecture to decide how to change the hardware and other collaboration parameters to improve performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahuja, S., Ensor, J.R., Lucco, S.E. (1990): ‘A Comparison of Application Sharing Mechanisms in Real-time Desktop Conferencing Systems’, Proceedings of the conference on Office Information Systems, 1990, pp: 238–248.
Chung, G. and Dewan P. (2001): ‘Flexible Support for Application-Sharing Architecture’, Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2001.
Chung, G and Dewan P. (2004): ‘Towards Dynamic Collaboration Architectures’, Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2004.
Danskin, J., Hanrahan, P. (1994): ‘Profiling the X Protocol’, Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, 1994, pp: 272–273.
Droms, R., Dyksen, W. (1990): ‘Performance Measures of the X Window System Communication Protocol’, Software — Practice and Experience (SPE), vol. 20, no. S2, 1990, pp: 119–136.
Dyck, J., Gutwin, C. Subramanian, S., Fedak, C. (2004): ‘High-performance Telepointers’, Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2004.
NEC 2000: ‘Windows 2000 Terminal Services Capacity and Scaling’, NEC, 2000.
Nieh, J., Yang, S. and Novik, N. (2000): ‘A Comparison of Thin Client Computing Architectures’, Technical Report CUCS-022-00 Columbia University, November 2000.
Richardson, T., Stafford-Fraser, Q., Wood, K., Hopper, A. (1998): ‘Virtual Network Computing’, IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 2, no. 1, January/February 1998, pp. 33–38.
Wong, A., Seltzer, M. (2000): ‘Evaluating Windows NT Terminal Server Performance’, Proceedings of the 3rd USENIX Windows NT Symposium, July 1999, pg: 145–154.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this paper
Cite this paper
Junuzovic, S., Chung, G., Dewan, P. (2005). Formally Analyzing Two-User Centralized and Replicated Architectures. In: Gellersen, H., Schmidt, K., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Mackay, W. (eds) ECSCW 2005. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4023-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4023-7_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-4022-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4023-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)