L. Ismail, D. Hagimont, A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 1999.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....contention for the server s CPU. 5 Related work Researchers have developed numerous mobile agent systems over the past decade. Few papers, however, present any substantial study of system performance. Fewer still examine scalability. We discuss the most relevant papers here. Ismail and Tichy [9] compare the performance of client server (RMI) with mobile agents. The client contacts one server to obtain a list of hotels, and another server to obtain a phone number for each hotel (one a time) In the alternative implementation a mobile agent visits the rst server and then the second ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 34(10):306-313, October 1999.

....mobile agents is to be explored. They also suggest that the goal should not be to make mobile agents yet another communication paradigm but instead a more effective distributed computing one. Their result crowned CORBA as the overall winner and Applets as the clear looser. Ismall and Hagimont in [10] investigate low level aspects that affect mobile agent performance. To this end, they implement a stripped down mobile agent platform on Java and conduct timings on the overhead of agent serialization, agent transfer over a local or wide area network, and agent installation on a receiving ....

L. Ismall and D. Hagimont. A Performance Evaluation of the Mobile Agent Paradigm. In OOP- SLA '99, Proceedings of the Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications, pages 306-313. ACM, November 1999.

....migrate from one machine to another for execution [17] This means that they can pause their execution, move to another machine and continue running from the point they stopped before. The use of mobile agent technology can introduce significant benefits in terms of application performance [16]. XenoServers will substantiate an ideal platform for deploying mobile agentbased applications, as agents will be able to rent computing resources dynamically, and migrate to XenoServers instantly. 2.4 Hosting web service components Placing mirrors of web servers close to the clients can help ....

Daniel Hagimont and L. Ismail. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. In Proceedings of the 1999.

.... is still highly disputed [23] There are various studies that show advantages for mobile agents over other techniques under certain circumstances, but in general they appear to rely on assumptions about the degree of semantic compression that can be achieved by the mobile agent at a remote site [1,9,16,28,32]. In this context semantic compression refers to the ability of an agent to reduce the size of the results of an operation due to its additional understanding of what is and isn t required (e.g. disposing of copies of the same web page and further filtering them based on some user profile) ....

Ismail L. & Hagimont D. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. OOPSLA, ACM SigPlan Notices, 34(10):306-313, 1998.

....protecting them from external attacks. The hosts use role based access control to limit what the agents can do. Alternatively, if desired, our agents can be signed digitally so that intermediate malicious nodes cannot modify the agent. Ismail and Hagimont carried out a performance evaluation [10] of their infrastructure for Java mobile agents, comparing them to approaches based on RMI and to Aglets [16] Their experiments focused on single hop agents on intra continental networks. Our experiments involved single and multi hop agents on intercontinental networks. Both works demonstrated ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A Performance Evaluation of the Mobile Agent Paradigm. In Proceedings of OOPSLA'99, pages 306-313, Denver, CO, November 1999.

....contention for the server s CPU. 5 Related work Researchers have developed numerous mobile agent systems over the past decade. Few papers, however, present any substantial study of system performance. Fewer still examine scalability. We discuss the most relevant papers here. Ismail and Tichy [9] compare the performance of client server (RMI) with mobile agents. The client contacts one server to obtain a list of hotels, and another server to obtain a phone number for each hotel (one a time) In the alternative implementation a mobile agent visits the rst server and then the second ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 34(10):306-313, October 1999.

....to adapt to the environments of those clients (e.g. compressing the data for slow clients) The system offers a wide range of functionalities that will cater for different adaptability scenarios. The possible advantages of adaptability by mobility are evaluated by Ismail and Hagimont [8]. Their proposed system, called the agent server, allows adaptability in a pure Java environment. The agent server provides a mechanism for clients to upload mobile agents to the servers. These agents will adapt the server s interface to the operational needs of the client, thus allowing extra ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont, "A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm", in Proceedings of the Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'99), Denver, CO USA, November 1999, pp. 306-313.

....remote evaluation, and mobile agents paradigms [10] Their results help evaluating under which circumstances the use of mobile agents is bene cial. Ismail and Hagimont carried out an empirical performance evaluation of their infrastructure for Java mobile agents, comparing them to Aglets [4] and to approaches based on RMI. Their experiments focused on single hop agents on intra continental networks. Our experiments involved single and multi hop agents on intercontinental networks. Both works demonstrated that the mobile agent model can lead to signi cant performance improvements. 7 ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A Performance Evaluation of the Mobile Agent Paradigm. In Proceedings of OOPSLA'99, pages 306-313, Denver, November 1999.

....we discuss the use of agents in this architecture and report the results of our experiments that show great improvements in the performance of dynamic distributed con guration. Finally, we review related work, and conclude. 2 Application Scenarios The application of mobile agents [KZ97, KG99, IH99, LA99] to a variety of distributed computations, including distributed dynamic con guration, can improve performance signi cantly. It also provides a uniform way to deal with code mobility and disconnected operations. We now look at three di erent uses of mobile agents for dynamic con guration. ....

....protecting them from external attacks. The hosts use role based access control to limit what the agents can do. Alternatively, if desired, our agents can be signed digitally so that intermediate malicious nodes cannot modify the agent. Ismail and Hagimont carried out a performance evaluation [IH99] of their infrastructure for Java mobile agents, comparing them to approaches based on RMI and to Aglets [LO98] Their experiments focused on single hop agents on intra continental networks. Our experiments involved single and multi hop agents on intercontinental networks. Both works ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A Performance Evaluation of the Mobile Agent Paradigm. In Proceedings of OOPSLA'99, pages 306-313, Denver, CO, November 1999.

....programs [14] or tamper proof hardware, in order to ensure a security property. 5Conclusion Little work has been done towards evaluating non functional properties of mobile agents. Some comparisons of Rpc based vs mobile agent based applications on a given network have been done (e.g. see [6]) These approaches to performance evaluation are purely experimental. Furthermore, they do not consider hybrid interactions mixing mobile agents, remote evaluations, and remote procedure calls. To the best of our knowledge, Carzaniga, Picco, and Vigna [2] were the first to provide some basic ....

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. In Proceedings of the Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 306--313, 1999.

No context found.

L. Ismail, D. Hagimont, A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 1999.

No context found.

D. Hagimont and L. Ismail, "A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm," in ACM SIGNAL Notices, vol. 34, 1999, pp. 306--313.

No context found.

L. Ismail and D. Hagimont. "A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm." ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 34(10):306-313, October 1999.

No context found.

D. Hagimont and L. Ismail, A Performance Evaluation of the Mobile Agent Paradigm, Proceedings of International Conference on Objectoriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA '99), pp.306-313, ACM Press, 1999.

No context found.

D. Hagimont and L. Ismail. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. In Proc. 14th ACM SIGPLAN conference on OOPSLA, pages 306--313. ACM Press, 1999. http://pauillac.inria.fr/leifer/research.html.

No context found.

D. Hagimont and L. Ismail. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, pages 306--313. ACM Press, 1999.

No context found.

Leila Ismail and Daniel Hagimont. A performance evaluation of the mobile agent paradigm. In Conference on Object-Oriented, pages 306--313, 1999.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC