1 / 21

FINDING THE OPTIMAL QUANTUM SIZE Revisiting the M/G/1 Round-Robin Queue

FINDING THE OPTIMAL QUANTUM SIZE Revisiting the M/G/1 Round-Robin Queue. VARUN GUPTA Carnegie Mellon University. M/G/1/RR. Incomplete jobs. Poisson arrivals. Jobs served for q units at a time. M/G/1/RR. Incomplete jobs. Poisson arrivals. Jobs served for q units at a time.

marc
Download Presentation

FINDING THE OPTIMAL QUANTUM SIZE Revisiting the M/G/1 Round-Robin Queue

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FINDING THE OPTIMAL QUANTUM SIZERevisiting the M/G/1 Round-Robin Queue VARUN GUPTA Carnegie Mellon University

  2. M/G/1/RR Incomplete jobs Poisson arrivals Jobs served for q units at a time

  3. M/G/1/RR Incomplete jobs Poisson arrivals Jobs served for q units at a time

  4. M/G/1/RR Incomplete jobs Completed jobs Poisson arrivals Jobs served for q units at a time • arrival rate =  • job sizes i.i.d. ~ S • load Squared coefficient of variability (SCV) of job sizes: C2 0

  5. q M/G/1/RR q→ 0 q=  M/G/1/FCFS M/G/1/PS  Preemptions cause overhead (e.g. OS scheduling)  Variable job sizes cause long delays preemption overheads job size variability small q large q

  6. GOAL Optimal operating q for M/G/1/RR with overheads and high C2 effect of preemption overheads SUBGOAL Sensitivity Analysis: Effect of q and C2 on M/G/1/RR performance (no switching overheads) • PRIOR WORK • Lots of exact analysis: [Wolff70], [Sakata et al.71], [Brown78] •  No closed-form solutions/bounds •  No simple expressions for interplay of q and C2

  7. Outline • Effect of q and C2 on mean response time • Approximate analysis • Bounds for M/G/1/RR • Choosing the optimal quantum size No preemption overheads Effect of preemption overheads

  8. Approximate sensitivity analysis of M/G/1/RR Approximation assumption 1: Service quantum ~ Exp(1/q) Approximation assumption 2: Job size distribution

  9. For high C2: E[TRR*] ≈E[TPS](1+q) Approximate sensitivity analysis of M/G/1/RR • Monotonic in q • Increases from E[TPS] →E[TFCFS] • Monotonic in C2 • Increases from E[TPS] →E[TPS](1+q)

  10. Outline • Effect of q and C2 on mean response time • Approximate analysis • Bounds for M/G/1/RR • Choosing the optimal quantum size

  11. M/G/1/RR bounds Assumption: job sizes  {0,q,…,Kq} THEOREM: Lower bound is TIGHT: E[S] = iq Upper bound is TIGHT within (1+/K): Job sizes  {0,Kq}

  12. Outline • Effect of q and C2 on mean response time • Approximate analysis • Bounds for M/G/1/RR • Choosing the optimal quantum size

  13. Optimizing q Preemption overhead = h • Minimize E[TRR] upper bound from Theorem: Common case:

  14. Mean response time h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  15. approximation q* optimum q Mean response time 1% h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  16. approximation q* optimum q Mean response time 2.5% 1% h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  17. approximation q* optimum q Mean response time 5% 2.5% 1% h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  18. approximation q* optimum q 7.5% Mean response time 5% 2.5% 1% h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  19. approximation q* optimum q 10% 7.5% Mean response time 5% 2.5% 1% h=0 service quantum (q) Job size distribution: H2 (balanced means) E[S] = 1, C2 = 19,  = 0.8

  20. Outline • Effect of q and C2 on mean response time • Approximate analysis • Bounds for M/G/1/RR • Choosing the optimal quantum size

  21. q Conclusion/Contributions • Simpleapproximation and bounds for M/G/1/RR • Optimal quantum size for handling highly variable job sizes under preemption overheads

More Related