Skip to main content

From Preemptive to Non-preemptive Scheduling Using Rejections

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computing and Combinatorics (COCOON 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 9797))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We study the classical problem of scheduling a set of independent jobs with release dates on a single machine. There exists a huge literature on the preemptive version of the problem, where the jobs can be interrupted at any moment. However, we focus here on the non-preemptive case, which is harder, but more relevant in practice. For instance, the jobs submitted to actual high performance platforms cannot be interrupted or migrated once they start their execution (due to prohibitive management overhead). We target on the minimization of the total stretch objective, defined as the ratio of the total time a job stays in the system (waiting time plus execution time), normalized by its processing time. Stretch captures the quality of service of a job and the minimum total stretch reflects the fairness between the jobs. So far, there have been only few studies about this problem, especially for the non-preemptive case. Our approach is based to the usage of the classical and efficient for the preemptive case shortest remaining processing time (SRPT) policy as a lower bound. We investigate the (offline) transformation of the SRPT schedule to a non-preemptive schedule subject to a recently introduced resource augmentation model, namely the rejection model according to which we are allowed to reject a small fraction of jobs. Specifically, we propose a \(\frac{2}{\epsilon }\)-approximation algorithm for the total stretch minimization problem if we allow to reject an \(\epsilon \)-fraction of the jobs, for any \(\epsilon >0\). This result shows that the rejection model is more powerful than the other resource augmentations models studied in the literature, like speed augmentation or machine augmentation, for which non-polynomial or non-scalable results are known. As a byproduct, we present a \(\frac{1}{\epsilon }\)-approximation algorithm for the total flow-time minimization problem which also rejects at most an \(\epsilon \)-fraction of jobs.

G. Lucarelli and D. Trystram—This work has been partially supported by the projet Moebus (ANR-13-INFR-0001) funded by ANR.

A. Srivastav—This work has been partially supported by the LabEx PERSYVAL-Lab (ANR-11-LABX-0025-01) funded by the French program “Investissement d’avenir”.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baker, K.R.: Introduction to Sequencing and Scheduling. Wiley, New York (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bansal, N., Chan, H.-L.: Weighted flow time does not admit \(o(1)\)-competitive algorithms. In: SODA, pp. 1238–1244 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bansal, N., Chan, H.-L., Khandekar, R., Pruhs, K., Stein, C., Schieber, B.: Non-preemptive min-sum scheduling with resource augmentation. In: FOCS, pp. 614–624 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bansal, N., Dhamdhere, K.: Minimizing weighted flow time. ACM Trans. Algorithms 3(4), 39 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bansal, N., Pruhs, K.: The geometry of scheduling. SIAM J. Comput. 43, 1684–1698 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Becchetti, L., Leonardi, S., Marchetti-Spaccamela, A., Pruhs, K.: Online weighted flow time and deadline scheduling. J. Discrete Algorithms 4, 339–352 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bender, M.A., Muthukrishnan, S., Rajaraman, R.: Approximation algorithms for average stretch scheduling. J. Sched. 7, 195–222 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bunde, D.P.: SPT is optimally competitive for uniprocessor flow. Inf. Process. Lett. 90, 233–238 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Chekuri, C., Khanna, S., Zhu, A.: Algorithms for minimizing weighted flow time. In: STOC, pp. 84–93 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Choudhury, A.R., Das, S., Garg, N., Kumar, A.: Rejecting jobs to minimize load and maximum flow-time. In: SODA, pp. 1114–1133 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Choudhury, A.R., Das, S., Kumar, A.: Minimizing weighted lp-norm of flow-time in the rejection model. In: FSTTCS, pp. 25–37 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Epstein, L., van Stee, R.: Optimal on-line flow time with resource augmentation. Discrete Appl. Math. 154, 611–621 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Im, S., Li, S., Moseley, B., Torng, E.: A dynamic programming framework for non-preemptive scheduling problems on multiple machines [extended abstract]. In: SODA, pp. 1070–1086 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kalyanasundaram, B., Pruhs, K.: Speed is as powerful as clairvoyance. J. ACM 47, 617–643 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Kellerer, H., Tautenhahn, T., Woeginger, G.J.: Approximability and nonapproximability results for minimizing total flow time on a single machine. SIAM J. Comput. 28, 1155–1166 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Leonardi, S., Raz, D.: Approximating total flow time on parallel machines. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 73, 875–891 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Muthukrishnan, S., Rajaraman, R., Shaheen, A., Gehrke, J.E.: Online scheduling to minimize average stretch. SIAM J. Comput. 34, 433–452 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Phillips, C.A., Stein, C., Torng, E., Wein, J.: Optimal time-critical scheduling via resource augmentation. Algorithmica 32, 163–200 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Schrage, L.: A proof of the optimality of the shortest remaining processing time discipline. Oper. Res. 16, 687–690 (1968)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Tao, J., Liu, T.: WSPT’s competitive performance for minimizing the total weighted flow time: from single to parallel machines. Math. Probl. Eng. (2013). doi:10.1155/2013/343287

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giorgio Lucarelli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lucarelli, G., Srivastav, A., Trystram, D. (2016). From Preemptive to Non-preemptive Scheduling Using Rejections. In: Dinh, T., Thai, M. (eds) Computing and Combinatorics . COCOON 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9797. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42634-1_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42634-1_41

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42633-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42634-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics