research-article

Public Access

SOAP: One Clean Analysis of All Age-Based Scheduling Policies

Authors:

Mor Harchol-Balter,

Alan Scheller-WolfAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems, Volume 2, Issue 1

Article No.: 16, Pages 1 - 30

https://doi.org/10.1145/3179419

Published: 03 April 2018 Publication History

Abstract

We consider an extremely broad class of M/G/1 scheduling policies called SOAP: Schedule Ordered by Age-based Priority. The SOAP policies include almost all scheduling policies in the literature as well as an infinite number of variants which have never been analyzed, or maybe not even conceived. SOAP policies range from classic policies, like first-come, first-serve (FCFS), foreground-background (FB), class-based priority, and shortest remaining processing time (SRPT); to much more complicated scheduling rules, such as the famously complex Gittins index policy and other policies in which a job's priority changes arbitrarily with its age. While the response time of policies in the former category is well understood, policies in the latter category have resisted response time analysis. We present a universal analysis of all SOAP policies, deriving the mean and Laplace-Stieltjes transform of response time.

References

[1]

Samuli Aalto and Urtzi Ayesta. 2006. Mean delay analysis of multi level processor sharing disciplines. In INFOCOM 2006. 25th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings. IEEE, 1--11.

[2]

Samuli Aalto, Urtzi Ayesta, Sem Borst, Vishal Misra, and Rudesindo Núñez-Queija. 2007. Beyond processor sharing. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 34. ACM, 36--43.

Digital Library

[3]

Samuli Aalto, Urtzi Ayesta, and Rhonda Righter. 2009. On the Gittins index in the M/G/1 queue. Queueing Systems 63, 1 (2009), 437--458.

Digital Library

[4]

Samuli Aalto, Urtzi Ayesta, and Rhonda Righter. 2011. Properties of the Gittins index with application to optimal scheduling. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences 25, 03 (2011), 269--288.

Digital Library

[5]

Konstantin Avrachenkov, Patrick Brown, and Natalia Osipova. 2009. Optimal choice of threshold in two level processor sharing. Annals of Operations Research 170, 1 (2009), 21--39.

[6]

Urtzi Ayesta, Onno J. Boxma, and Ina Maria Verloop. 2012. Sojourn times in a processor sharing queue with multiple vacations. Queueing Systems 71, 1 (2012), 53--78.

Digital Library

[7]

Sem Borst, Rudesindo Núñez-Queija, and Bert Zwart. 2006. Sojourn time asymptotics in processor-sharing queues. Queueing Systems 53, 1 (2006), 31--51.

Digital Library

[8]

Jacqueline Boyer, Fabrice Guillemin, Philippe Robert, and Bert Zwart. 2002. Heavy tailed M/G/1-PS queues with impatience and admission control in packet networks. In INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-Second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications. IEEE Societies, Vol. 1. IEEE, 186--195.

[9]

Hanhua Feng and Vishal Misra. 2003. Mixed scheduling disciplines for network flows. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 31. ACM, 36--39.

Digital Library

[10]

Steve W. Fuhrmann and Robert B. Cooper. 1985. Stochastic decompositions in the M/G/1 queue with generalized vacations. Operations research 33, 5 (1985), 1117--1129.

Digital Library

[11]

John Gittins, Kevin Glazebrook, and Richard Weber. 2011. Multi-armed Bandit Allocation Indices. John Wiley & Sons.

[12]

Mor Harchol-Balter. 2013. Performance Modeling and Design of Computer Systems: Queueing Theory in Action (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.

Digital Library

[13]

Esa Hyytiä, Samuli Aalto, and Aleksi Penttinen. 2012. Minimizing slowdown in heterogeneous size-aware dispatching systems. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 40. ACM, 29--40.

Digital Library

[14]

J. Keilson and L. D. Servi. 1988. A distributional form of Little?s law. Operations Research Letters 7, 5 (1988), 223--227.

Digital Library

[15]

David G. Kendall. 1953. Stochastic processes occurring in the theory of queues and their analysis by the method of the imbedded Markov chain. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics (1953), 338--354.

[16]

Leonard Kleinrock. 1967. Time-shared systems: A theoretical treatment. Journal of the ACM (JACM) 14, 2 (1967), 242--261.

Digital Library

[17]

Leonard Kleinrock. 1976. Queueing Systems, Volume 2: Computer Applications. Vol. 66. Wiley New York.

[18]

Minghong Lin, Adam Wierman, and Bert Zwart. 2010. The average response time in a heavy-traffic SRPT queue. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 38. ACM, 12--14.

Digital Library

[19]

Misja Nuyens, Adam Wierman, and Bert Zwart. 2008. Preventing large sojourn times using SMART scheduling. Operations Research 56, 1 (2008), 88--101.

Digital Library

[20]

Natalia Osipova, Urtzi Ayesta, and Konstantin Avrachenkov. 2009. Optimal policy for multi-class scheduling in a single server queue. In Teletraffic Congress, 2009. ITC 21 2009. 21st International. IEEE, 1--8.

[21]

Linus E. Schrage. 1967. The queue M/G/1 with feedback to lower priority queues. Management Science 13, 7 (1967), 466--474.

Digital Library

[22]

Linus E Schrage and Louis W Miller. 1966. The queue M/G/1 with the shortest remaining processing time discipline. Operations Research 14, 4 (1966), 670--684.

Digital Library

[23]

Lajos Takács. 1963. Delay distributions for one line with Poisson input, general holding times, and various orders of service. Bell Labs Technical Journal 42, 2 (1963), 487--503.

[24]

Adam Wierman. 2007. Fairness and classifications. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 34. ACM, 4--12.

Digital Library

[25]

Adam Wierman, Mor Harchol-Balter, and Takayuki Osogami. 2005. Nearly insensitive bounds on SMART scheduling. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 33. ACM, 205--216.

Digital Library

[26]

Adam Wierman and Misja Nuyens. 2008. Scheduling despite inexact job-size information. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 36. ACM, 25--36.

Digital Library

[27]

Ronald W. Wolff. 1982. Poisson arrivals see time averages. Operations Research 30, 2 (1982), 223--231.

Digital Library

Cited By

Yu GScully Z(2024)Strongly Tail-Optimal Scheduling in the Light-Tailed M/G/1Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/36560118:2(1-33)Online publication date: 29-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3656011
Hong YScully Z(2024)Performance of the Gittins policy in the G/G/1 and G/G/k, with and without setup timesPerformance Evaluation10.1016/j.peva.2023.102377163:COnline publication date: 16-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.peva.2023.102377
Akbari-Moghaddam MDown D(2023)SEH: Size Estimate Hedging Scheduling of QueuesACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation10.1145/358049133:4(1-17)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3580491
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

SOAP: One Clean Analysis of All Age-Based Scheduling Policies
SIGMETRICS '18

We consider an extremely broad class of M/G/1 scheduling policies called SOAP: Schedule Ordered by Age-based Priority. The SOAP policies include almost all scheduling policies in the literature as well as an infinite number of variants which have never ...
SOAP: One Clean Analysis of All Age-Based Scheduling Policies
SIGMETRICS '18: Abstracts of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems

We consider an extremely broad class of M/G/1 scheduling policies called SOAP: Schedule Ordered by Age-based Priority. The SOAP policies include almost all scheduling policies in the literature as well as an infinite number of variants which have never ...
Analysis of customers' impatience in queues with server vacations

Many models for customers impatience in queueing systems have been studied in the past; the source of impatience has always been taken to be either a long wait already experienced at a queue, or a long wait anticipated by a customer upon arrival. In ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems

Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems Volume 2, Issue 1

March 2018

603 pages

EISSN:2476-1249

DOI:10.1145/3203302

Editors:
Augustin Chaintreau
Columbia University
,
Aditya Akella
University of Wisconsin-Madison
,
Adam Wierman
California Institute of Technology

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

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]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 April 2018

Published in POMACS Volume 2, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

NSF
ARCS Foundation
Google

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

21
Total Citations
View Citations
697
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)145
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)18

Reflects downloads up to 22 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Yu GScully Z(2024)Strongly Tail-Optimal Scheduling in the Light-Tailed M/G/1Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/36560118:2(1-33)Online publication date: 29-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3656011
Hong YScully Z(2024)Performance of the Gittins policy in the G/G/1 and G/G/k, with and without setup timesPerformance Evaluation10.1016/j.peva.2023.102377163:COnline publication date: 16-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.peva.2023.102377
Akbari-Moghaddam MDown D(2023)SEH: Size Estimate Hedging Scheduling of QueuesACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation10.1145/358049133:4(1-17)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3580491
Gast NGaujal BKhun K(2023)Testing indexability and computing Whittle and Gittins index in subcubic timeMathematical Methods of Operations Research10.1007/s00186-023-00821-497:3(391-436)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00186-023-00821-4
Aalto SScully Z(2022)On the Gittins index for multistage jobsQueueing Systems10.1007/s11134-022-09760-z102:3-4(353-371)Online publication date: 7-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11134-022-09760-z
Ibrahim R(2022)Personalized scheduling in service systemsQueueing Systems: Theory and Applications10.1007/s11134-022-09747-w100:3-4(445-447)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11134-022-09747-w
Scully ZGrosof IHarchol-Balter M(2021)The Gittins Policy is Nearly Optimal in the M/G/k under Extremely General ConditionsProceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/34283284:3(1-29)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428328
Scully ZGrosof IHarchol-Balter M(2021)Optimal multiserver scheduling with unknown job sizes in heavy trafficPerformance Evaluation10.1016/j.peva.2020.102150145(102150)Online publication date: Jan-2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peva.2020.102150
Harchol-Balter M(2021)Open problems in queueing theory inspired by datacenter computingQueueing Systems: Theory and Applications10.1007/s11134-020-09684-697:1-2(3-37)Online publication date: 27-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11134-020-09684-6
Akbari-Moghaddam MDown D(2021)SEH: Size Estimate Hedging for Single-Server QueuesQuantitative Evaluation of Systems10.1007/978-3-030-85172-9_9(168-185)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-85172-9_9
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents