Background: Many software systems can be tuned for multiple objectives (e.g., faster runtime, less required memory, less network traffic or energy consumption, etc.). Such systems can suffer from “disagreement” where different models have different (or even opposite) insights and tactics on how to optimize a system. For configuration problems, we show that (a) model disagreement is rampant; yet (b) prior to this paper, it has barely been explored.

Goal: We aim at helping practitioners and researchers better solve multi-objective configuration optimization problems, by resolving model disagreement.

Method: We propose a dimension reduction method called VEER that builds a useful one-dimensional approximation to the original N-objective space. Traditional model-based optimizers use Pareto search to locate Pareto-optimal solutions to a multi-objective problem, which is computationally heavy on largescale systems. VEER builds a surrogate that can replace the Pareto sorting step after deployment.

Results: Compared to the prior state-of-the-art, for 11 configurable systems, VEER significantly reduces disagreement and execution time, without compromising the optimization performance in most cases. For our largest problem (with tens of thousands of possible configurations), optimizing with VEER finds as good or better optimizations with zero model disagreements, three orders of magnitude faster.

Conclusion: When employing model-based optimizers for multi-objective optimization, we recommend to apply VEER, which not only improves the execution time, but also resolves the potential model disagreement problem

For replication purposes, our code and datasets are on-line: https://github.com/anonymous12138/multiobj.