Advertisement

Journal of Grid Computing

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 665–679 | Cite as

A Budget Constrained Scheduling Algorithm for Workflow Applications

  • Hamid Arabnejad
  • Jorge G. BarbosaEmail author
Article

Abstract

Service-oriented computing has enabled a new method of service provisioning based on utility computing models, in which users consume services based on their Quality of Service (QoS) requirements. In such pay-per-use models, users are charged for services based on their usage and on the fulfilment of QoS constraints; execution time and cost are two common QoS requirements. Therefore, to produce effective scheduling maps, service pricing must be considered while optimising execution performance. In this paper, we propose a Heterogeneous Budget Constrained Scheduling (HBCS) algorithm that guarantees an execution cost within the user’s specified budget and that minimises the execution time of the user’s application. The results presented show that our algorithm achieves lower makespans, with a guaranteed cost per application and with a lower time complexity than other budget-constrained state-of-the-art algorithms. The improvements are particularly high for more heterogeneous systems, in which a reduction of 30 % in execution time was achieved while maintaining the same budget level.

Keywords

Utility computing Deadline Quality of Service Planning Success Rate 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bharathi, S., Chervenak, A., Deelman, E., Mehta, G., Su, M.H., Vahi, K.: Characterization of scientific workflows. In: Third Workshop on Workflows in Support of Large-Scale Science, 2008. WORKS 2008, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bittencourt, L. F., Madeira, E. R. M.: Hcoc: a cost optimization algorithm for workflow scheduling in hybrid clouds. J. Internet Serv. Appl. 2(3), 207–227 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Broberg, J., Venugopal, S., Buyya, R.: Market-oriented grids and utility computing: The state-of-the-art and future directions. J. Grid Comput. 6(3), 255–276 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byun, E.-K., Kee, Y.-S., Kim, J.-S., Deelman, E., Maeng, S.: Bts: Resource capacity estimate for time-targeted science workflows. J. Parallel Dist. Comput. 71(6), 848–862 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Canon, L.C., Jeannot, E., Sakellariou, R., Zheng, W.: Comparative evaluation of the robustness of dag scheduling heuristics. In: Grid Computing, pp. 73–84. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Casanova, H., Legrand, A., Quinson, M.: Simgrid: a generic framework for large-scale distributed experiments. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Computer Modeling and Simulation, UKSIM ’08, pp. 126–131. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, W.-N., Zhang, J.: An ant colony optimization approach to a grid workflow scheduling problem with various qos requirements. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 39(1), 29–43 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coffman, E.G., Bruno, J.L: Computer and Job-shop Scheduling Theory. Wiley (1976)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deelman, E., Blythe, J., Gil, Y., Kesselman, C., Mehta, G., Vahi, K., Blackburn, K., Lazzarini, A., Arbree, A., Cavanaugh, R., et al: Mapping abstract complex workflows onto grid environments. J. Grid Comput. 1(1), 25–39 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dŏgan, A., Özguner, F.: Bi-objective scheduling algorithms for execution time–reliability trade-off in heterogeneous computing systems. Comput. J. 48(3), 300–314 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Juve, G., Chervenak, A., Deelman, E., Bharathi, S., Mehta, G., Vahi, K.: Characterizing and profiling scientific workflows. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 29(3), 682–692 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kwok, Y., Ahmad, I.: Static scheduling algorithms for allocating directed task graphs to multiprocessors. ACM Comput. Surv. 31(4), 406–471 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Prodan, R., Wieczorek, M.: Bi-criteria scheduling of scientific grid workflows. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 7(2), 364–376 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sakellariou, R., Zhao, H., Tsiakkouri, E., Dikaiakos, M.: Scheduling workflows with budget constraints. Integr. Res. Grid Comput., 189–202 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh, G., Kesselman, C., Deelman, E.: A provisioning model and its comparison with best-effort for performance-cost optimization in grids. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, pp. 117–126. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sen, S., Li, J., Qingjia, H., Shuang, K., Wang, J.: Cost-efficient task scheduling for executing large programs in the cloud. Parallel Comput. 39, 177–188 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Szabo, C., Kroeger, T.: Evolving multi-objective strategies for task allocation of scientific workflows on public clouds. In: WCCI IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Topcuoglu, H., Hariri, S., Wu, M.: Performance-effective and low-complexity task scheduling for heterogeneous computing. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 13(3), 260–274 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Velho, P., Legrand, A.: Accuracy study and improvement of network simulation in the simGrid framework. In: Proccedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques (SIMUTools). Rome, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wieczorek, M., Podlipnig, S., Prodan, R., Fahringer, T.: Bi-criteria scheduling of scientific workflows for the grid. In: 8th IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2008. CCGRID’08, pp. 9–16. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yu, J., Buyya, R.: A budget constrained scheduling of workflow applications on utility grids using genetic algorithms. In: Workshop on Workflows in Support of Large-Scale Science, 2006. WORKS’06, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu, J., Buyya, R.: Scheduling scientific workflow applications with deadline and budget constraints using genetic algorithms. Sci. Program. 14(3), 217–230 (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yu, J., Buyya, R., Ramamohanarao, K.: Workflow scheduling algorithms for grid computing. Metaheuristics Sched. Distrib. Comput. Environ., 173–214 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yu, J., Buyya, R., Tham, C.K.: Cost-based scheduling of scientific workflow applications on utility grids. In: First International Conference on e-Science and Grid Computing, 2005, pp. 8–pp. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jia, Y., Ramamohanarao, K., Buyya, R.: Deadline/budget-based scheduling of workflows on utility grids. Market-Oriented Grid Util. Comput., 427–450 (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zheng, W., Sakellariou, R.: Budget-deadline constrained workflow planning for admission control in market-oriented environments. In: Economics of Grids, Clouds, Systems, and Services, pp. 105–119. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zheng, W., Sakellariou, R.: Budget-deadline constrained workflow planning for admission control. J. Grid Comput., 1–19 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LIACC, Departamento de Engenharia Informática, Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations