Scheduling despite inexact job-size information

SIGMETRICS'08: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems

Volumn 36, Issue 1 SPECIAL ISSUE, 2008, Pages 25-36

  Wierman, Adam ^a   Nuyens, Misja ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Statkraft Markets ^*  (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Job size estimates; M g l; Queueing; Response time; Scheduling; Shortest remaining processing time; SMART; SRPT

Indexed keywords

JOB SIZE ESTIMATES; M/G/L; QUEUEING; RESPONSE TIME; SHORTEST REMAINING PROCESSING TIME; SMART; SRPT;

COMPUTER SYSTEMS; COMPUTERS; CONTROL THEORY; HEURISTIC METHODS; SCHEDULING; SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIALS; WATER SUPPLY TUNNELS;

RESPONSE TIME (COMPUTER SYSTEMS);

EID: 57349157701     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1375457.1375461     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. M. Arlitt and C. Williamson. Web server workload characterization: the search for invariants. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 1996.
2. N. Bansal. On the average sojourn time under M/M/1/SRPT. Oper. Res. Letters, 22(2):195-200, 2005.
3. N. Bansal and D. Gamarnik. Handling load with less stress. Queueing Systems. 54(1):45-54. 2006.
4. N. Bingham, C. Goldie, and J. Teugels. Regular Variation. Cambridge University Press, 1987.
5. S. Borst. O. Boxrna, R. Nunez-Qucija. and B. Zwart. The impact of the service discipline on delay asymptotics. Performance Evaluation, 54:175-206, 2003.
6. O. Boxrna and B. Zwart. Tails in scheduling. Perf. Eval. Rev., 34(4):13-20, 2007.
7. A. Cockcroft. Watching your weh server. http://www.theunixinsidcr.com, 1996.
8. R. W. Conway, W. L. Maxwell, and L. W. Miller. Theory of Scheduling. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1967.
9. M. Crovclla and A. Bestavros. Self-similarity in world wide web traffic: Evidence and possible causes. Trans, on Networking. 5(6):835-846, 1997.
10. A. B. Downey. A parallel workload model and its implications for processor allocation. In Proc. of High Performance Distributed Computing, pages 112-123, August 1997.
11. E. Friedman and S. Henderson. Fairness and efficiency in web server protocols. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2003.
12. J. Gehrke, S. Muthukrishnan, R. Rajaraman, and A. Shaheen. Scheduling to minimize average stretch online. In 40th Annual symposium on Foundation of Computer Science, pages 433-443; 1999.
13. M. Gong and C. Williamson. Simulation evaluation of hybrid SRPT scheduling policies. In Proc. of IEEE MASCOTS, 2004.
14. M. Harchol-Balter, B. Schrocder, M. Agrawal, and N. Bansal. Size-based scheduling to improve web performance. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 21(2), May 2003.
15. M. Hu, J. Zhang, and J. Sadowsky. A size-aided opportunistic scheduling scheme in wireless networks. In Globecom, 2003.
16. A. Kherani. Sojourn times in (discrete) time shared systems and their continuous time limits. In Proc. of ValueTools, 2006.
17. A. A. Kherani and R. Nunez-Queija. TCP as an implementation of age-based scheduling: fairness and pcrformaucs. In IEEE Infocom, 2006.
18. A. Kumar. Comparative performance analysis of versions of TCP in a local network with a lossy link. IEEE/ACM Trans. / Networking, 6:485-498, 1998.
19. D. Lu, P. Dinda, Y. Qiao, and H. Sheng. Effects and implications of file size/service time correlation on web server scheduling policies. In Proc. of IEEE MASCOTS, 2005.
20. D. Lu, H. Sheng, and P. Dinda. Size-based scheduling policies with inaccurate scheduling information. In Proc. of IEEE MASCOTS, 2004.
21. R. Mangharam. M. Demirhan, R. Rajkumar. and D. Raychaudhuri. Size matters: Size-based scheduling for MPEG-4 over wireless channels. In SPIE & ACM Proceedings in Multimedia Computing and Networking, pages 110-122, 2004.
22. D. McWherter, B. Schroeder, N. Ailamaki, and M. Harchol-Balter. Priority mechanisms for OLTP and transactional web applications. In Int. Conf on Data Engineering, 2004.
23. D. McWherter, B. Schroeder, N. Ailamaki, and M. Harchol-Balter. Improving preemptive prioritization via statistical characterization of OLTP locking. In Int. Conf on Data Engineering, 2005.
24. Microsoft. The arts and science of web server tuning and internet information servers 5.0. microsoft technct - insights and answers for IT professionals. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/. 2001.
25. R. Nuncz-Queija. Queues with equally heavy sojourn time andv service requirement distributions. Ann. Oper. Res, 113:101-117, 2002.
26. M. Nuyens. The Foreground-Background Queue. PhD thesis University of Amsterdam. 2004.
27. M. Nuyens. A. Wierman, and B. Zwart. Preventing large sojourn times using SMART scheduling. Oper. Res., in press.
28. M. Nuyens and B. Zwart. A large-deviations analysis of the GI/GI/1 SRPT queue. Queueing Sys., 54(2):85-97, 2006.
29. J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, D. Towsley, and J. Kurose. Modeling TCP throughput: a simple model and its empirical validation. ACM Computer Communication Review, 28:303 314, 1998.
30. V. S. Pai, P. Druschel, and W. Zwaenepoel. Flash: An efficient and portable web server. In Proc. of USENIX, 1999.
31. Y. Qiao, D. Lu. R. Bustamante. and P. Dinda. Looking at the server side of peer-to-peer systems. Technical Report NWU-CS-04-37, Northwestern University, 2004.
32. I. A. Rai, G. Urvoy-Keller, and E. Biersack. Analysis of LAS scheduling for job size distributions with high variance. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2003.
33. I. A. Rai, G. Urvoy-Keller, M. Vernon, and E. W. Biersack. Performance modeling of LAS based scheduling in packet switched networks. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics-Performance, 2004.
34. M. Rawat and A. Kshcrnkalyani. SWIFT: Scheduling in web servers for fast response time. In Syrap. on Net. Comp. and App., 2003.
35. D. Raz, H. Levy, and B. Avi-Itzhak. A resource-allocation queueing fairness measure. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics-Perforuiance, 2004.
36. L. E. Schrage. A proof of the optimality of the shortest remaining processing time discipline. Operations Research, 16:678-690, 1968.
37. The Apache software foundation. The Apache web server.
38. A. Wierman. Fairness and classifications. Perf. Eval. Rev., 34(4):4-12, 2007.
39. A. Wierman and M. Harchol-Balter. Classifying scheduling policies with respect to unfairness in an M/GI/1. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2003.
40. A. Wierman and M. Harchol-Balter. Classifying scheduling policies with respect to higher moments of response time. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2005.
41. A. Wierman, M. Harchol-Balter, and T. Osogami. Nearly insensitive bounds on SMART scheduling. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2005.
42. C. Yang, A. Wierman, S. Shakkottai, and M. Harchol-Balter. Tail asymptotics for policies favoring short jobs in a many-flows regime. In Proc. of ACM Sigmetrics, 2006.