Competitive Analysis of Constrained Queueing Systems

Authors Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, Kamesh Munagala



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.143.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.49 MB
  • 13 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Sungjin Im
Janardhan Kulkarni
Kamesh Munagala

Cite AsGet BibTex

Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Kamesh Munagala. Competitive Analysis of Constrained Queueing Systems. In 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 55, pp. 143:1-143:13, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.143

Abstract

We consider the classical problem of constrained queueing (or switched networks): There is a set of N queues to which unit sized packets arrive. The queues are interdependent, so that at any time step, only a subset of the queues can be activated. One packet from each activated queue can be transmitted, and leaves the system. The set of feasible subsets that can be activated, denoted S, is downward closed and is known in advance. The goal is to find a scheduling policy that minimizes average delay (or flow time) of the packets. The constrained queueing problem models several practical settings including packet transmission in wireless networks and scheduling cross-bar switches. In this paper, we study this problem using the the competitive analysis: The packet arrivals can be adversarial and the scheduling policy only uses information about packets currently queued in the system. We present an online algorithm, that for any epsilon > 0, has average flow time at most O(R^2/epsilon^3*OPT+NR) when given (1+epsilon) speed, i.e., the ability to schedule (1+epsilon) packets on average per time step. Here, R is the maximum number of queues that can be simultaneously scheduled, and OPT is the average flow time of the optimal policy. This asymptotic competitive ratio O(R^3/epsilon^3) improves upon the previous O(N/epsilon^2) which was obtained in the context of multi-dimensional scheduling [Im/Kulkarni/Munagala, FOCS 2015]. In the full general model where N can be exponentially larger than R, this is an exponential improvement. The algorithm presented in this paper is based on Makespan estimates which is very different from that in [Im/Kulkarni/Munagala, FOCS 2015], a variation of the Max-Weight algorithm. Further, our policy is myopic, meaning that scheduling decisions at any step are based only on the current composition of the queues. We finally show that speed augmentation is necessary to achieve any bounded competitive ratio.
Keywords
  • Online scheduling
  • Average flow time
  • Switch network
  • Adversarial

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. S. Anand, Naveen Garg, and Amit Kumar. Resource augmentation for weighted flow-time explained by dual fitting. In SODA, pages 1228-1241, 2012. URL: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2095213.
  2. Nikhil Bansal, Tracy Kimbrel, and Kirk Pruhs. Speed scaling to manage energy and temperature. J. ACM, 54(1):3:1-3:39, March 2007. Google Scholar
  3. 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. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11134-006-7587-7.
  4. Shang-Tse Chuang, Ashish Goel, Nick McKeown, and Balaji Prabhakar. Matching output queueing with a combined input/output-queued switch. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 17(6):1030-1039, 1999. Google Scholar
  5. Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Kamesh Munagala. Competitive algorithms from competitive equilibria: Non-clairvoyant scheduling under polyhedral constraints. In STOC, 2014. Google Scholar
  6. Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Kamesh Munagala. Competitive flow time algorithms for polyhedral scheduling. In IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2015, Berkeley, CA, USA, 17-20 October, 2015, pages 506-524, 2015. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2015.38.
  7. Sungjin Im, Benjamin Moseley, and Kirk Pruhs. A tutorial on amortized local competitiveness in online scheduling. SIGACT News, 42(2):83-97, 2011. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1998037.1998058.
  8. Bala Kalyanasundaram and Kirk Pruhs. Speed is as powerful as clairvoyance. Journal of the ACM, 47(4):617-643, 2000. Google Scholar
  9. 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. Google Scholar
  10. F.P. Kelly, L. Massoulié, and N.S. Walton. Resource pooling in congested networks: proportional fairness and product form. Queueing Systems, 63(1-4):165-194, 2009. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11134-009-9143-8.
  11. Nick McKeown. The islip scheduling algorithm for input-queued switches. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 7(2):188-201, 1999. Google Scholar
  12. Nick McKeown, Adisak Mekkittikul, Venkat Anantharam, and Jean Walrand. Achieving 100%throughput in an input-queued switch. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 47(8):1260-1267, 1999. Google Scholar
  13. Michael J. Neely, Eytan Modiano, and Yuan-Sheng Cheng. Logarithmic delay for n × n packet switches under the crossbar constraint. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., 15(3):657-668, June 2007. Google Scholar
  14. Balaji Prabhakar, Nick McKeown, and Ritesh Ahuja. Multicast scheduling for input-queued switches. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 15(5):855-866, 1997. Google Scholar
  15. Devavrat Shah, Neil Walton, and Yuan Zhong. Optimal queue-size scaling in switched networks. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGMETRICS/PERFORMANCE Joint International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, SIGMETRICS'12, pages 17-28, 2012. Google Scholar
  16. Leandros Tassiulas and Anthony Ephremides. Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 37(12):1936-1948, 1992. Google Scholar