## 3 Provisioning Resource Pool View
### Quantitative Evaluation
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Method**} & \multirow{3}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Iteration** \\ **(Count)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**VM Creation Phase**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & \begin{tabular}{c} **Instance** \\ **Spawn** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Instance** \\ **Build** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Instance** \\ **Build** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Initialization** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Total** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} IaC \\ \end{tabular} } & 1 st & 1.89 & 2.16 & 112.73 & 120 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 2 nd & 1.86 & 2.09 & 106.9 & 114 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 3 rd & 1.93 & 2.2 & 111.75 & 118 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 4 th & 2.06 & 2.32 & 109.14 & 117 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 5 th & 1.96 & 2.31 & 110.76 & 117 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} BVMO \\ \end{tabular} } & 1 st & 3.06 & 5.2 & 81.12 & 91 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 2 nd & 3.11 & 5.29 & 82.98 & 93 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 3 rd & 3.13 & 5.27 & 84.24 & 95 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 4 th & 3.29 & 5.63 & 83.6 & 95 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 5 th & 3.18 & 5.53 & 92.76 & 104 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Test 1—VM with OS. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Method**} & \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Iteration** \\ **(Count)** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**VM Creation Phase**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & \begin{tabular}{c} **Instance** \\ **Spawn** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Instance** \\ **Build** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Initialization** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \ \begin{tabular}{c} **Total** \\ **(Seconds)** \\ \end{tabular}  \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} IaC \\ \end{tabular}  } & 1 st & 1.95 & 2.2 & 278.01 & 305 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 2 nd & 1.89 & 2.13 & 286.37 & 314 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 3 rd & 1.78 & 2.06 & 280.65 & 312 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 4 th & 1.73 & 1.99 & 275.57 & 304 \\ \cline{2-6}  & 5 th & 1.81  
In the case of the method using IaC, as listed in Table 9, the spawn time was 1.832 s on average, and the build time was 2.1 s on average. When using the BVMO presented in this study, the average spawn time was 3.088 s, and the average build time was 5.318 s. This result was similar to the experimental results derived from Test 1. In addition, in the case of initialization time, the average execution time of the method using IaC was 280.652 s, and that of the method using BVMO was 92.136 s. It was confirmed that a difference of 188.489 s appeared between the cases where software was used among the provisioning resources and those where it was not. In the case of OS, there are various supports in terms of platforms and hypervisors, except for special cases (e.g., Baremetal system); however, in the case of software that operates internally, a large difference appears as the time required to download and set up the software, and this is reflected in the user-environment-initialization stage. The total execution time of Test 2 was 309.2 s for the method using IaC and 102.6 s for the method using BVMO. Table 10 lists the experimental results for increasing the number of software packages when creating a VM following Test 1 and Test 2. As listed in Table 10, in the case of the method using IaC, the average spawn time was 2.522 s, and the average build time was 3.042 s. When BVMO was used, the average spawn time was 3.122 s, and the average build time was 5.394 s. In the previous IaC method, the spawn time was approximately 1.9 s, and the build time was approximately 2.1 s; however, the average values differed by about 0.6 s and 0.9 s, respectively. This appears to occur because the IaC specification analysis process is added according to the software addition. However, because the BVMO method performs only volume connections, it is confirmed that there is no significant difference from the previous results.