Practical Engineering Approaches to Scalable Cloud Architecture and Computational Resource Optimization

Authors

  • Antonov Sergey Viktorovich Technical Director Organization, LLC “Center for Applied Digital Solutions”, Moscow, Russia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54536/ajiri.v5i3.8120

Keywords:

Autoscaling, Cloud Architecture, Distributed Systems, Event-Driven Architecture, Machine Learning Deployment, Microservices, Resource Optimization, Scalability

Abstract

The engineering of scalable cloud systems has matured from empirical practice into a discipline grounded in formal scalability theory, distributed systems research, and production-derived architectural principles. Existing treatments address load scalability, microservices consistency, autoscaling, and production ML reliability as separate problems, each evaluated through single-mechanism studies conducted under stationary or weakly non-stationary conditions that diverge from production environments where these problems interact simultaneously. This review closes that gap by tracing a structural pattern common to all four domains: each first-order engineering solution introduces a second-order problem of comparable difficulty, a regularity not previously consolidated across the scalability, decomposition, resource optimization, and ML deployment literatures. Its added value over prior reviews lies in connecting formal theoretical constraints, including Amdahl’s Law, the Universal Scalability Law, and Conway’s Law, with production-derived quantitative benchmarks, rather than treating theory and practice as separate registers.
The source pool combines foundational theoretical works, empirical studies published in IEEE and ACM venues between 2018 and 2024, and systematic reviews and large-sample case study collections, most notably Velepucha and Flores (2023), covering 71 primary studies of microservices migration, and Paleyes et al. (2022), synthesizing 209 machine learning deployment case studies. Inclusion required that a source report a formal theoretical result, an empirical measurement obtained under stated experimental conditions, or a synthesis of multiple primary studies; sources offering only prescriptive guidance without supporting measurement were excluded. Synthesis proceeded by extracting, for each domain, the mechanism, experimental conditions, and quantitative outcome, then identifying structural patterns recurring across domains.The review’s practical engineering contribution is a set of decision criteria for consistency protocol selection, autoscaling architecture design, and ML deployment monitoring that translate these findings into guidance actionable by practitioners operating production cloud systems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amdahl, G. M. (1967). Validity of the single processor approach to achieving large scale computing capabilities. In Proceedings of the April 18-20, 1967, spring joint computer conference (AFIPS), 483–485. https://doi.org/10.1145/1465482.1465560

Amershi, S., Begel, A., Bird, C., DeLine, R., Gall, H., Kamar, E., Nagappan, N., Nushi, B., & Zimmermann, T. (2019). Software engineering for machine learning: A case study. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00042

Blinowski, G., Ojdowska, A., & Przybyłek, A. (2022). Monolithic vs. microservice architecture: A performance and scalability evaluation. IEEE Access, 10, 20357–20374. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3152803

Conway, M. E. (1968). How do committees invent? Datamation, 14(4), 28–31.

Covington, P., Adams, J., & Sargin, E. (2016). Deep neural networks for YouTube recommendations. Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959190

Crankshaw, D., Wang, X., Zhou, G., Franklin, M. J., Stoica, I., & Gonzalez, J. (2017). Clipper: A low-latency online prediction serving system. Proceedings of the 14th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), 613–627.

Eismann, S., Scheuner, J., Van Eyk, E., Schwinger, M., Grohmann, J., Herbst, N., Abad, C. L., & Iosup, A. (2021). Serverless applications: Why, when, and how? IEEE Software, 38(1), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2020.3023302

Eismann, S., Scheuner, J., Van Eyk, E., Schwinger, M., Grohmann, J., Herbst, N., Abad, C. L., & Iosup, A. (2022). The state of serverless applications: Collection, characterization, and community consensus. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 48(10), 4152–4166. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2021.3113940

Faustino, D., Gonçalves, N., Portela, M., & Silva, A. R. (2024). Stepwise migration of a monolith to a microservice architecture: Performance and migration effort evaluation. Performance Evaluation, 164, Article 102411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peva.2024.102411

Ghobaei-Arani, M., Souri, A., & Rahmanian, A. A. (2020). Resource management approaches in fog computing: A comprehensive review. Journal of Grid Computing, 18(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10723-019-09491-1

Gunther, N. J. (2007). Guerrilla capacity planning: A tactical approach to planning for highly scalable applications and services. Springer.

Laigner, R., Zhou, Y., Salles, M. A. V., Liu, Y., & Kalinowski, M. (2021). Data management in microservices: State of the practice, challenges, and research directions. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 14(13), 3348–3361. https://doi.org/10.14778/3484224.3484232

Li, W., Lemieux, Y., Gao, J., Zhao, Z., & Han, Y. (2020). Service mesh: Challenges, state of the art, and future research opportunities. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE). https://doi.org/10.1109/SOSE.2019.00026

Lloyd, W., Ramesh, S., Chinthalapati, S., Ly, L., & Pallickara, S. (2018). Serverless computing: An investigation of factors influencing microservice performance. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1109/IC2E.2018.00039

Lorido-Botran, T., Miguel-Alonso, J., & Lozano, J. A. (2014). A review of auto-scaling techniques for elastic applications in cloud environments. Journal of Grid Computing, 12, 559–592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10723-014-9314-7

Paleyes, A., Urma, R.-G., & Lawrence, N. D. (2022). Challenges in deploying machine learning: A survey of case studies. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(6), Article 114. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533378

Polezhaev, A. (2026a). Architecting scalable cloud systems: From startup to enterprise. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.

Polezhaev, A. (2026b). Artificial intelligence in production: Practical engineering beyond theory. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.

Polezhaev, A. S. (2026c). Event-driven architectures are replacing monoliths: The future of software design. Universum: Technical Sciences, 4(145). https://doi.org/10.32743/UniTech.2026.145.4.22553

Rahmatulloh, A., Fikri, M., Alamsyah, A., & Pratiwi, H. S. (2022). Event-driven architecture to improve performance and scalability in microservices-based systems. 2022 International Conference Advancement in Data Science, E-learning and Information Systems (ICADEIS), 01-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICADEIS56544.2022.10037390

Vahidinia, P., Farahani, B., & Aliee, F. S. (2023). Mitigating cold start problem in serverless computing: A reinforcement learning approach. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 10(5), 3917–3927. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2022.3165127

Velepucha, V., & Flores, P. (2023). A survey on microservices architecture: Principles, patterns and migration challenges. IEEE Access, 11, 88339-88358. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3305687

Downloads

Published

2026-08-08

How to Cite

Viktorovich, A. S. . (2026). Practical Engineering Approaches to Scalable Cloud Architecture and Computational Resource Optimization. American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation, 5(3), 36-44. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajiri.v5i3.8120

Similar Articles

41-49 of 49

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.