Skip to main content
Log in

Minimizing Mean Response Time in Nonobservable Distributed Processing Systems with Nodes Operating under Egalitarian Processor-Sharing Policy

  • MATHEMATICAL MODELS AND COMPUTATIONAL METHODS
  • Published:
Journal of Communications Technology and Electronics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract—Consideration is given to the dispatching problem in an almost nonobservable distributed processing system with M, M ≥ 2, single-server queues operating in parallel, each under the processor-sharing discipline. Jobs having the same job size distribution arrive one-by-one to the dispatcher, which immediately routes it to one of the queues. When making a routing decision, the dispatcher has no online information about the system (like current queues sizes, size of arriving job, etc.). The only information available to the dispatcher is job-size distribution, job-interarrival-time distribution, server speeds, time instants of previously arrived jobs, and previous routing decisions. Under these conditions, one is interested in the routing policies that minimize the job long-run mean response time. A new class of dispatching policies is proposed that, according to the numerical experiments, may significantly outperform all classical dispatching policies available for such system: (optimal) probabilistic policy and the round-robin policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. From the practical point of view, these systems find application in modeling systems of cloud computing, grid-systems, and volunteer computing systems.

  2. That is, the dispatcher has no queue for storing incoming jobs which allows conducting deferred choice.

  3. The solutions proposed in the paper are rather universal and allow constructing procedures for another optimality criteria, for instance, for the variance of response time and for the quantile of a prescribed level of response time.

  4. As a main algorithm, we consider different algorithms well proven in observable systems of parallel processing of jobs.

  5. For simplicity’s sake, we assume that a single stream of homogeneous jobs arrives in the system. However, there is no principal difficulty in applying the obtained results to the system with several input streams of heterogeneous jobs.

  6. In the foreign literature, PAP (probabilistic allocation policy), RND (Random), or BS (Bernoulli Splitting).

  7. This situation is related with the intuitive consideration that the input stream to each server is more regular (i.e., less random) in the deterministic strategy than in the probabilistic one, which may imply reduction in the mean response time.

  8. Note that, for systems of servers with the FIFO policy, it is sometimes possible to construct such deterministic sequences that cannot be improved without using additional information about the system in dispatching. In these cases, they are apparently close to optimal (see details in [11–14]).

  9. Perhaps, the most prominent variant of such strategy is the round robin (further, RR): nth arrived job is scheduled to the server with the number (n mod M) + 1.

  10.  Although the input stream to each server is more regular (less random) in the deterministic strategy, the cyclical strategy may lead to unlimited values of W (see, e.g., Table 2) even in weakly loaded systems. This is associated with the fact that the loading of one or several servers in this strategy becomes larger than unity.

  11.  At first glance, it is not clear if the account for additional information can lower the value W. There are intuitive suppositions about this, see [4, P. 61]. The numerical experiments, some results of which are presented in Sect. 4, justify them.

  12.  The prefix so- from English scant observation.

  13.  For an arbitrary recurrent input stream, for the RND strategy there is no analytical approach to compute the optimal values (p1, …, pM) (from the point of view of long-run mean response time), which are the probabilities pi that server i is selected for the next job. In this situation the probability pi was set equal to \({{{{{v}}^{{(i)}}}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{{{{v}}^{{(i)}}}} {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^M {{{{v}}^{{(j)}}}} }}} \right. \kern-0em} {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^M {{{{v}}^{{(j)}}}} }}\).

REFERENCES

  1. B. Javadi, D. Kondo, J.-M. Vincent, and D. P. Anderson, “Discovering Statistical Models of Availability in Large Distributed Systems: An Empirical Study of Setihome,” IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 22, 1896−1903 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. B. Javadi and P. Thulasiraman, R. Buyya, “Cloud resource provisioning to extend the capacity of local resources in the presence of failures”, in Proc. 14th Int. Conf. on High Performance Computing and Communication & 2012 IEEE 9th Int. Conf. on Embedded Software and Systems, Liverpool, England, UK, June 2527,2012 (IEEE, New York, 2012), pp. 311−319.

  3. S. F. Yashkov, Analysis of Queues in the Computer (Radio i Svyaz’, Moscow, 1989) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. G. Konovalov and R.V. Razumchik, “About placing jobs on two servers with incomplete monitoring,” Inf. & Primen. 10 (4), 57−67 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. G. Konovalov and R. V. Razumchik, “Overview of job placement models and algorithms in parallel service systems,” Inf. & Primen. 9 (4), 56−67 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. B. Combe and O. J. Boxma, “Optimization of static traffic allocation policies,” Theor. Comput. Sci. 125 (1), 17−43 (1994).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. J. Sethuraman and M. S. Squillante, “Optimal stochastic scheduling in multiclass parallel queues,” in Proc. 1999 ACM SIGMETRICS Int. Conf. on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (SIGMETRICS ’99), Atlanta, Georgia, USA, May 1−4,1999, (ACM, New York, 1999), pp. 93−102.

  8. Ch. S. Tang and M. van Vliet, “Traffic allocation for manufacturing systems,” Eur. J. Operat. Res. 75 (1), 171−185 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. M. J. Neely and E. Modiano, “Convexity in queues with general inputs,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 51, 706−714 (2005).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. C. H. Bell and S. Stidham, “Individual versus social optimization in the allocation of customers to alternative servers,” Man. Sci. 29, 831−839 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. E. Altman, B. Gaujal, and A. Hordijk, “Balanced sequences and optimal routing,” J. ACM 47, 752−775 (2000).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. J. Anselmi, B. Gaujal, and T. Nesti, “Control of parallel non-observable queues: asymptotic equivalence and optimality of periodic policies”, Stoch. Syst. 5, 120−145 (2015).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. A. Hordijk and D. A. Van der Laan, “Periodic routing to parallel queues and billiard sequences,” Math. Methods Operations Res. 59, 173−192 (2004).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. M. Konovalov and R. Razumchik, “Improving routing decisions in parallel non-observable queues,” Computing 100 (10), 1−21 (2018).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. M. Konovalov and R. Razumchik, “Minimizing mean response time in non-observable distributed systems with processor sharing nodes”, Communications ECMS 33 (1), 456−461 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to M. G. Konovalov or R. V. Razumchik.

Additional information

Translated by E. Oborin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Konovalov, M.G., Razumchik, R.V. Minimizing Mean Response Time in Nonobservable Distributed Processing Systems with Nodes Operating under Egalitarian Processor-Sharing Policy. J. Commun. Technol. Electron. 65, 677–689 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064226920060182

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064226920060182

Navigation