Static vs. dynamic cloud scheduling: A benchmark driven performance and energy study

  • Saba Naz

    Department of Computer Science, Institute of Space Technology, KICSIT Campus, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
  • Altaf Hussain orcid

    Department of Computer Science, Institute of Space Technology, KICSIT Campus, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
Article ID: 4439
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59400/cai4439
Keywords: cloud computing, job scheduling, energy efficiency, resource utilization, CloudSimPlus simulation

Abstract

Major multinational corporations, including Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, and Google, continue to advance network and computational infrastructures through the deployment of highly efficient data centers worldwide to strengthen their cloud computing services. Despite these technological advancements, cloud computing environments still face several critical challenges, such as optimal resource utilization, cost efficiency, security, fault tolerance, scalability, and energy consumption. For organizations operating private clouds or delivering cloud-based services, the primary objectives include maximizing resource utilization, minimizing response and waiting times, increasing throughput and profitability, and enhancing the overall user experience, with energy efficiency being a particularly important concern. This study presents an empirical evaluation of various static and dynamic cloud job scheduling algorithms using the CloudSimPlus simulation framework. The algorithms are assessed using two well-established scientific benchmark datasets: HCSP and GoCJ instances. Experimental results reveal that the Resource-Aware Load Balancing Algorithm (RALBA) emerges as the most energy-efficient static scheduling approach, achieving reduced makespan, improved resource utilization, and lower energy consumption. In contrast, the Max–Min algorithm exhibits the highest makespan, the lowest throughput, inefficient resource utilization, and the greatest energy consumption. Among the dynamic scheduling techniques, DE-RALBA demonstrates superior resource utilization and competitive makespan performance while maintaining relatively efficient energy usage. However, the results also indicate that dynamic scheduling approaches may incur higher energy consumption depending on workload characteristics and rescheduling overhead. Unlike prior studies that evaluate scheduling strategies in isolation, this work provides a unified, benchmark-driven, and energy-aware comparison of static and dynamic scheduling paradigms, enabling deeper insights into performance–energy trade-offs.

Published
2026-05-07
How to Cite
Naz, S., & Hussain, A. (2026). Static vs. dynamic cloud scheduling: A benchmark driven performance and energy study. Computing and Artificial Intelligence, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.59400/cai4439
Issue
Vol. 4 No. 2 (2026)
Section
Article

Copyright (c) 2026 Saba Naz, Altaf Hussain

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

[1]Atiewi S, Yussof S. Comparison between Cloud Sim and Green Cloud in Measuring Energy Consumption in a Cloud Environment. In: Proceedings of the 2014 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Science Applications and Technologies; 29–30 December 2014; Amman, Jordan. pp. 9–14. doi: 10.1109/ACSAT.2014.9

[2]Mell PM, Grance T. The NIST definition of cloud computing (No. NIST SP 800-145). National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2011. doi: 10.6028/NIST.SP.800-145

[3]Atiewi S, Abuhussein A, Saleh MA. Impact of Virtualization on Cloud Computing Energy Consumption: Empirical Study. In: Proceedings of the ISCSIC ’18: The 2nd International Symposium on Computer Science and Intelligent Control; 21–23 September 2018; Stockholm, Sweden. pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1145/3284557.3284738

[4]Hussain A, Aleem M, Islam MA, et al. A Rigorous Evaluation of State-of-the-Art Scheduling Algorithms for Cloud Computing. IEEE Access. 2018; 6: 75033–75047. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2884480

[5]Ismail L, Fardoun A. EATS: Energy-Aware Tasks Scheduling in Cloud Computing Systems. Procedia Computer Science. 2016; 83: 870–877. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.04.178

[6]Murad SA, Muzahid AJM, Azmi ZRM, et al. A review on job scheduling technique in cloud computing and priority rule based intelligent framework. Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences. 2022; 34(6): 2309–2331. doi: 10.1016/j.jksuci.2022.03.027

[7]Shaik N, Jyotheeswai P. A survey on energy aware job scheduling algorithms in cloud environment. i-manager’s Journal on Cloud Computing. 2016; 3(1): 30.

[8]Chen F, Schneider JG, Yang Y, et al. An energy consumption model and analysis tool for Cloud computing environments. In: Proceedings of the 2012 First International Workshop on Green and Sustainable Software (GREENS); 3 June 2012; Zurich, Switzerland. pp. 45–50. doi: 10.1109/GREENS.2012.6224255

[9]Beloglazov A, Buyya R. Optimal online deterministic algorithms and adaptive heuristics for energy and performance efficient dynamic consolidation of virtual machines in Cloud data centers. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience. 2012; 24(13): 1397–1420. doi: 10.1002/cpe.1867

[10]Berl A, Gelenbe E, Di Girolamo M, et al. Energy-Efficient Cloud Computing. The Computer Journal. 2010; 53(7): 1045–1051. doi: 10.1093/comjnl/bxp080

[11]Panwar SS, Rauthan MMS, Barthwal V. A systematic review on effective energy utilization management strategies in cloud data centers. Journal of Cloud Computing. 2022; 11(1): 95. doi: 10.1186/s13677-022-00368-5

[12]Hussain A, Aleem M. GoCJ: Google Cloud Jobs Dataset for Distributed and Cloud Computing Infrastructures. Data. 2018; 3(4): 38. doi: 10.3390/data3040038

[13]Braun TD, Siegel HJ, Beck N, et al. A Comparison of Eleven Static Heuristics for Mapping a Class of Independent Tasks onto Heterogeneous Distributed Computing Systems. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing. 2001; 61(6): 810–837. doi: 10.1006/jpdc.2000.1714

[14]Khair Y, Benlabbes H. Opportunistic Load Balancing for Virtual Machines Scheduling in a Cloud Environment. Engineering Proceedings. 2023; 29(1): 1. doi: 10.3390/engproc2023029001

[15]Qaisar MUF, Wang X, Hawbani A, et al. TORAS: Trustworthy Load-Balanced Opportunistic Routing for Asynchronous Duty-Cycled WSNs. IEEE Systems Journal. 2023; 17(2): 2259–2270. doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2022.3221096

[16]Rao PH, Rajakumar PS, Geetha S. Load Balancing Issues and Challenges in Cloud Environment. In: Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Electronic Systems and Intelligent Computing (ICESIC); 22–23 November 2024; Chennai, India. pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/ICESIC61777.2024.10846533

[17]Ali SA, Alam M. A relative study of task scheduling algorithms in cloud computing environment. In: Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference on Contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I); 14–17 December 2016; Greater Noida, India. pp. 105–111. doi: 10.1109/IC3I.2016.7917943

[18]Patni S, Saxena D, Singh AK. Resource Management in Cloud Computing: Concepts and Implementation. Springer Nature; 2025. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-83053-2

[19]Huankai Chen, Wang F, Helian N, et al. User-priority guided Min-Min scheduling algorithm for load balancing in cloud computing. In: Proceedings of the 2013 National Conference on Parallel Computing Technologies (PARCOMPTECH); 21–23 February 2013; Bangalore, India. pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/ParCompTech.2013.6621389

[20]Maipan-Uku, JY, Muhammed A, Abdullah A, et al. Efficient Loads Balancing for Grid Computing System Using Min-Min Scheduling Algorithm. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research (IJAER). 2015; 10(95): 75–79

[21]Mathew T, Sekaran KC, Jose J. Study and analysis of various task scheduling algorithms in the cloud computing environment. In: Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI); 24–27 September 2014; Delhi, India. pp. 658–664. doi: 10.1109/ICACCI.2014.6968517

[22]Parsa S, Entezari-Maleki R. RASA: A New Grid Task Scheduling Algorithm. International Journal of Digital Content Technology and its Applications. 2009; 3(4): 91–99. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220670335_RASA_a_new_grid_task_scheduling_algorithm

[23]Raeisi-Varzaneh M, Dakkak O, Fazea Y, et al. Advanced cost-aware Max–Min workflow tasks allocation and scheduling in cloud computing systems. Cluster Computing. 2024; 27(9): 13407–13419. doi: 10.1007/s10586-024-04594-1

[24]Ninh A, Shen ZJM. Stochastic Resource Allocation Problems: Minmax and Maxmin Solutions. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. 2024; 26(6): 2322–2335. doi: 10.1287/msom.2022.0550

[25]Murad SA, Azmi ZRM, Muzahid AJM, et al. SG-PBFS: Shortest Gap-Priority Based Fair Scheduling technique for job scheduling in cloud environment. Future Generation Computer Systems. 2024; 150: 232–242. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2023.09.005

[26]Tsai HC, Hong YWP, Sheu JP. Completion Time Minimization for UAV-Enabled Surveillance Over Multiple Restricted Regions. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing. 2022; 1–14. doi: 10.1109/TMC.2022.3200732

[27]Sino M, Domazet E. Scalable Parallel Processing: Architectural Models, Real-Time Programming, and Performance Evaluation. Engineering Proceedings. 2025; 104(1): 60. doi: 10.3390/engproc2025104060

[28]Hussain A, Aleem M, Khan A, et al. RALBA: a computation-aware load balancing scheduler for cloud computing. Cluster Computing. 2018; 21(3): 1667–1680. doi: 10.1007/s10586-018-2414-6

[29]Awan A, Aleem M, Hussain A, et al. DFARM: a deadline-aware fault-tolerant scheduler for cloud computing. Cluster Computing. 2024; 27(7): 9323–9344. doi: 10.1007/s10586-024-04419-1

[30]Mao Y, Chen X, Li X. Max–Min Task Scheduling Algorithm for Load Balance in Cloud Computing. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; 27–29 October 2025; Paris, France. pp. 457–465. doi: 10.1007/978-81-322-1759-6_53

[31]Alaei N, Safi-Esfahani F. RePro-Active: a reactive–proactive scheduling method based on simulation in cloud computing. The Journal of Supercomputing. 2018; 74(2): 801–829. doi: 10.1007/s11227-017-2161-0

[32]Nabi S, Ibrahim M, Jimenez JM. DRALBA: Dynamic and Resource Aware Load Balanced Scheduling Approach for Cloud Computing. IEEE Access. 2021; 9: 61283–61297. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3074145

[33]Hussain A, Aleem M, Ur Rehman A, et al. DE-RALBA: dynamic enhanced resource aware load balancing algorithm for cloud computing. PeerJ Computer Science. 2025; 11: e2739. doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.2739

[34]Khan ZI, Khan M, Shah SNM. MAADRR: Multi-Agent Adaptive Dynamic Round Robin for Cloud Scheduling Using Real Cloud Workload Traces. IEEE Access. 2026; 14: 44165–44184. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3676311

[35]Guérout T, Monteil T, Da Costa G, et al. Energy-aware simulation with DVFS. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory. 2013; 39: 76–91. doi: 10.1016/j.simpat.2013.04.007

[36]Minas L, Ellison B. Energy Efficiency for Information Technology: How To Reduce Power Consumption in Servers and Data Centers. Intel Press; 2009.

[37]Beloglazov A, Abawajy J, Buyya R. Energy-aware resource allocation heuristics for efficient management of data centers for Cloud computing. Future Generation Computer Systems. 2012; 28(5): 755–768. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2011.04.017

[38]Arshad U, Aleem M, Srivastava G, et al. Utilizing power consumption and SLA violations using dynamic VM consolidation in cloud data centers. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2022; 167: 112782. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112782

[39]Ahvar E, Orgerie AC, Lebre A. Estimating Energy Consumption of Cloud, Fog, and Edge Computing Infrastructures. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Computing. 2022; 7(2): 277–288. doi: 10.1109/TSUSC.2019.2905900

[40]Lin W, Wang H, Zhang Y, et al. A cloud server energy consumption measurement system for heterogeneous cloud environments. Information Sciences. 2018; 468: 47–62. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.08.032

[41]Beloglazov A, Buyya R, Lee YC, et al. A Taxonomy and Survey of Energy-Efficient Data Centers and Cloud Computing Systems. In: Advances in Computers. Elsevier; 2011. pp. 47–111. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385512-1.00003-7

[42]Liu Z, Cho S. Characterizing Machines and Workloads on a Google Cluster. In: Proceedings of the 2012 41st International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops; 10–13 September 2012; Pittsburgh, PA, USA. pp. 397–403. doi: 10.1109/ICPPW.2012.57

[43]Moreno IS, Garraghan P, Townend P, et al. An Approach for Characterizing Workloads in Google Cloud to Derive Realistic Resource Utilization Models. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Seventh International Symposium on Service-Oriented System Engineering; 25–28 March 2013; San Francisco, CA, USA. pp. 49–60. doi: 10.1109/SOSE.2013.24

[44]Reiss C, Tumanov A, Gregory GR, et al. Towards Understanding Heterogeneous Clouds At Scale: Google Trace Analysis. Intel Science and Technology Center for Cloud Computing; 2012. Available online: https://istc-cc.cmu.edu/publications/papers/2012/ISTC-CC-TR-12-101.pdf

[45]Kavulya S, Tan J, Gandhi R, et al. An Analysis of Traces from a Production MapReduce Cluster. In: Proceedings of the 2010 10th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing; 17–20 May 2010; Melbourne, VIC, Australia. pp. 94–103. doi: 10.1109/CCGRID.2010.112

[46]Gad AG, Houssein EH, Zhou M, et al. Damping-Assisted Evolutionary Swarm Intelligence for Industrial IoT Task Scheduling in Cloud Computing. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2024; 11(1): 1698–1710. doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2023.3291367

[47]Choppara P, Mangalampalli SS. A Hybrid Task Scheduling Technique in Fog Computing Using Fuzzy Logic and Deep Reinforcement Learning. IEEE Access. 2024; 12: 176363–176388. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3505546

[48]Choppara P, Mangalampalli SS. Reliability and Trust Aware Task Scheduler for Cloud-Fog Computing Using Advantage Actor Critic (A2C) Algorithm. IEEE Access. 2024; 12: 102126–102145. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3432642