Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2591796.2591814acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Competitive algorithms from competitive equilibria: non-clairvoyant scheduling under polyhedral constraints

Published: 31 May 2014 Publication History

Abstract

We introduce and study a general scheduling problem that we term the Packing Scheduling problem (PSP). In this problem, jobs can have different arrival times and sizes; a scheduler can process job j at rate xj, subject to arbitrary packing constraints over the set of rates (x) of the outstanding jobs. The PSP framework captures a variety of scheduling problems, including the classical problems of unrelated machines scheduling, broadcast scheduling, and scheduling jobs of different parallelizability. It also captures scheduling constraints arising in diverse modern environments ranging from individual computer architectures to data centers. More concretely, PSP models multidimensional resource requirements and parallelizability, as well as network bandwidth requirements found in data center scheduling.
In this paper, we design non-clairvoyant online algorithms for PSP and its special cases -- in this setting, the scheduler is unaware of the sizes of jobs. Our results are summarized as follows.
• For minimizing total weighted completion time, we show a O(1)-competitive algorithm. Surprisingly, we achieve this result by applying the well-known Proportional Fairness algorithm (PF) to perform allocations each time instant. Though PF has been extensively studied in the context of maximizing fairness in resource allocation, we present the first analysis in adversarial and general settings for optimizing job latency. Our result is also the first O(1)-competitive algorithm for weighted completion time for several classical non-clairvoyant scheduling problems.
•For minimizing total weighted flow time, for any constant ε > 0, any O(n1---ε)-competitive algorithm requires extra speed (resource augmentation) compared to the offline optimum. We show that PF is a O(log n)-speed O(log n)-competitive non-clairvoyant algorithm, where n is the total number of jobs. We further show that there is an instance of PSP for which no non-clairvoyant algorithm can be O(n1---ε)-competitive with o(√log n) speed.
•For the classical problem of minimizing total flow time for unrelated machines in the non-clairvoyant setting, we present the first online algorithm which is scalable ((1 + ε)-speed O(1)-competitive for any constant ε > 0). No non-trivial results were known for this setting, and the previous scalable algorithm could handle only related machines. We develop new algorithmic techniques to handle the unrelated machines setting that build on a new single machine scheduling policy. Since unrelated machine scheduling is a special case of PSP, when contrasted with the lower bound for PSP, our result also shows that PSP is significantly harder than perhaps the most general classical scheduling settings.
Our results for PSP show that instantaneous fair scheduling algorithms can also be effective tools for minimizing the overall job latency, even when the scheduling decisions are non-clairvoyant and constrained by general packing constraints.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (p313-sidebyside.mp4)

References

[1]
http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/spot-instances/.
[2]
http://hadoop.apache.org.
[3]
http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vmware-distributed-resource-scheduler-drs-ds-en.pdf.
[4]
F. Ahmad, S. T. Chakradhar, A. Raghunathan, and T. N. Vijaykumar. Tarazu: optimizing mapreduce on heterogeneous clusters. In ASPLOS, pages 61--74. ACM, 2012.
[5]
S. Anand, N. Garg, and A. Kumar. Resource augmentation for weighted flow-time explained by dual fitting. In SODA, pages 1228--1241, 2012.
[6]
Y. Azar, U. Bhaskar, L. Fleischer, and D. Panigrahi. Online mixed packing and covering. In SODA, pages 85--100, 2013.
[7]
Y. Azar and I. Gamzu. Ranking with submodular valuations. In SODA, pages 1070--1079, 2011.
[8]
N. Bansal and H.-L. Chan. Weighted flow time does not admit o(1)-competitive algorithms. In SODA, pages 1238--1244, 2009.
[9]
N. Bansal, M. Charikar, R. Krishnaswamy, and S. Li. Better scalable algorithms for broadcast scheduling. In SODA, pages 55--71, 2014.
[10]
N. Bansal, R. Krishnaswamy, and V. Nagarajan. Better scalable algorithms for broadcast scheduling. In ICALP (1), pages 324--335, 2010.
[11]
T. Bonald, L. Massoulié, A. Proutière, and J. Virtamo. A queueing analysis of max-min fairness, proportional fairness and balanced fairness. Queueing Syst. Theory Appl., 53(1-2):65--84, June 2006.
[12]
S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe. Convex Optimization. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
[13]
J. S. Chadha, N. Garg, A. Kumar, and V. N. Muralidhara. A competitive algorithm for minimizing weighted flow time on unrelated machines with speed augmentation. In STOC, pages 679--684, 2009.
[14]
R. Cole, V. Gkatzelis, and G. Goel. Mechanism design for fair division: allocating divisible items without payments. In ACM EC, pages 251--268, 2013.
[15]
J. Edmonds, D. D. Chinn, T. Brecht, and X. Deng. Non-clairvoyant multiprocessor scheduling of jobs with changing execution characteristics. J. Scheduling, 6(3):231--250, 2003.
[16]
J. Edmonds and K. Pruhs. Scalably scheduling processes with arbitrary speedup curves. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 8(3):28, 2012.
[17]
K. Fox, S. Im, and B. Moseley. Energy efficient scheduling of parallelizable jobs. In SODA, pages 948--957, 2013.
[18]
K. Fox and M. Korupolu. Weighted flowtime on capacitated machines. In SODA, pages 129--143, 2013.
[19]
N. Garg and A. Kumar. Minimizing average flow-time: Upper and lower bounds. In FOCS, pages 603--613, 2007.
[20]
A. Ghodsi, M. Zaharia, B. Hindman, A. Konwinski, I. Stoica, and S. Shenker. Dominant resource fairness: Fair allocation of multiple resource types. In NSDI, 2011.
[21]
A. Gupta, S. Im, R. Krishnaswamy, B. Moseley, and K. Pruhs. Scheduling heterogeneous processors isn't as easy as you think. In SODA, pages 1242--1253, 2012.
[22]
A. Gupta, R. Krishnaswamy, and K. Pruhs. Online primal-dual for non-linear optimization with applications to speed scaling. In WAOA, pages 173--186, 2012.
[23]
L. A. Hall, A. S. Schulz, D. B. Shmoys, and J. Wein. Scheduling to minimize average completion time: Off-line and on-line approximation algorithms. Math. of Oper. Res., 22(3):513--544, 1997.
[24]
S. Im and B. Moseley. An online scalable algorithm for average flow time in broadcast scheduling. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 8(4):39, 2012.
[25]
S. Im, B. Moseley, and K. Pruhs. A tutorial on amortized local competitiveness in online scheduling. SIGACT News, 42(2):83--97, 2011.
[26]
B. Kalyanasundaram and K. Pruhs. Speed is as powerful as clairvoyance. JACM, 47(4):617--643, 2000.
[27]
F. Kelly, L. Massoulié, and N. Walton. Resource pooling in congested networks: proportional fairness and product form. Queueing Systems, 63(1-4):165--194, 2009.
[28]
F. P. Kelly, A. K. Maulloo, and D. K. H. Tan. Rate control for communication networks: Shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(3):pp. 237--252, 1998.
[29]
G. Lee, B.-G. Chun, and R. H. Katz. Heterogeneity-aware resource allocation and scheduling in the cloud. In Proceedings of the 3rd USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing, HotCloud, volume 11, 2011.
[30]
J. Nash. The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18(2):155--162, 1950.
[31]
L. Popa, G. Kumar, M. Chowdhury, A. Krishnamurthy, S. Ratnasamy, and I. Stoica. Faircloud: sharing the network in cloud computing. In ACM SIGCOMM, pages 187--198, 2012.
[32]
K. Pruhs, J. Sgall, and E. Torng. Handbook of Scheduling: Algorithms, Models, and Performance Analysis, chapter Online Scheduling. 2004.
[33]
M. Queyranne and M. Sviridenko. A (2+epsilon)-approximation algorithm for the generalized preemptive open shop problem with minsum objective. J. Algorithms, 45(2):202--212, 2002.
[34]
A. S. Schulz and M. Skutella. Random-based scheduling: New approximations and lp lower bounds. In RANDOM, pages 119--133, 1997.
[35]
K. Shvachko, H. Kuang, S. Radia, and R. Chansler. The hadoop distributed file system. In IEEE MSST, pages 1--10, 2010.
[36]
D. P. Williamson and D. B. Shmoys. The Design of Approximation Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
[37]
J. Wolf, D. Rajan, K. Hildrum, R. Khandekar, V. Kumar, S. Parekh, K.-L. Wu, and A. Balmin. Flex: A slot allocation scheduling optimizer for mapreduce workloads. In Middleware, pages 1--20. Springer, 2010.
[38]
M. Zaharia, A. Konwinski, A. D. Joseph, R. Katz, and I. Stoica. Improving mapreduce performance in heterogeneous environments. In OSDI, pages 29--42, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2008. USENIX Association.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Optimal Job Scheduling With Resource Packing for Heterogeneous ServersIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2021.306820129:4(1553-1566)Online publication date: Aug-2021
  • (2021)Profit Maximization in Mobile Crowdsourcing: A Competitive AnalysisIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30587899(27827-27839)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2020)Dynamic Weighted Fairness with Minimal DisruptionsProceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/33794854:1(1-18)Online publication date: 27-May-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
STOC '14: Proceedings of the forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
May 2014
984 pages
ISBN:9781450327107
DOI:10.1145/2591796
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 31 May 2014

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. equilibria
  2. flow time
  3. non-clairvoyance
  4. online scheduling
  5. polyhedral constraints
  6. proportional fairness
  7. unrelated machines

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

STOC '14
Sponsor:
STOC '14: Symposium on Theory of Computing
May 31 - June 3, 2014
New York, New York

Acceptance Rates

STOC '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 91 of 319 submissions, 29%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,469 of 4,586 submissions, 32%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Optimal Job Scheduling With Resource Packing for Heterogeneous ServersIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2021.306820129:4(1553-1566)Online publication date: Aug-2021
  • (2021)Profit Maximization in Mobile Crowdsourcing: A Competitive AnalysisIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30587899(27827-27839)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2020)Dynamic Weighted Fairness with Minimal DisruptionsProceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/33794854:1(1-18)Online publication date: 27-May-2020
  • (2019)Online Job Scheduling with Redundancy and Opportunistic CheckpointingIEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems10.1109/TPDS.2018.287113530:4(897-909)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2019
  • (2019)Online Job Scheduling with Resource Packing on a Cluster of Heterogeneous ServersIEEE INFOCOM 2019 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications10.1109/INFOCOM.2019.8737465(1441-1449)Online publication date: Apr-2019
  • (2019)Primal–Dual and Dual-Fitting Analysis of Online Scheduling Algorithms for Generalized Flow-Time ProblemsAlgorithmica10.1007/s00453-019-00583-8Online publication date: 11-May-2019
  • (2019)Green Computing AlgorithmicsComputing and Software Science10.1007/978-3-319-91908-9_10(161-183)Online publication date: 2019
  • (2019)Revisiting SRPT for Job Scheduling in Computing ClustersQueueing Theory and Network Applications10.1007/978-3-030-27181-7_17(276-291)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2019
  • (2018)Online load balancing on related machinesProceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing10.1145/3188745.3188966(30-43)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2018
  • (2018)A Survey of the State-of-the-Art in Fair Multi-Resource Allocations for Data CentersIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2017.274306615:1(169-183)Online publication date: Mar-2018
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media