Advertisement

Journal of Central South University

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 465–472 | Cite as

A novel deadline and budget constrained scheduling heuristics for computational grids

  • Yong Wang (王勇)Email author
  • R. M. Bahati
  • M. A. Bauer
Article

Abstract

The conventional deadline and budget constrained (DBC) scheduling heuristics for economic-based computational grids does not take the inconsistency of grid heterogeneity into account, which can lead to decline of application completion ratios. Motivated by this fact, a novel DBC scheduling heuristics was proposed to deal with sequential workflow applications. In order to valuate the inconsistency, the relative cost (RC) metric was introduced, which was used to indicate the task-starving degree for resources. The new algorithm assigns tasks to resources, considering completion time, budget and RC together. The GridSim toolkit and the benchmark suites of the standard performance evaluation corporation (SPEC) were used to simulate the heterogeneous grid environment and applications. The experimental results show that the task and workflow completion ratios of the new heuristics are higher than those of the conventional heuristics.

Key words

computional grids economic-based grid grid brocker grid scheduling simulation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    FOSTER I. Globus toolkit version 4: Software for service-oriented systems [C]// IFIP International Conference on Network and Parallel Computing. Beijing: Springer Berlin, 2005: 2–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    FOSTER I, KESSELMAN C. The grid: Blueprint for a new computing infrastructure [M]. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, 1999: 10–16.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    FERNÁNDEZ-BACA D. Allocating modules to processors in a distributed system [J]. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1989, 15(11): 1427–1436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    BUYYA R, ABRAMSON D, GIDDY J, STOCKINGER H. Economic models for resource management and scheduling in grid computing [J]. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2002, 14(13): 1507–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    PELLICER S, LIU H, PAN Y. Mapping, scheduling, and fault tolerance in grid environments [M]// Engineering the Grid: Status and Perspective. California: American Scientific Publishers, 2006: 370–391.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    BRAUN T D, SIEGEL H J, BECK N, BOLONI L, FREUND R F, HENSGEN D, MAHESWARAN M, REUTHER A I, ROBERTSON J P, THEYS M D, YAO B. A comparison of eleven static heuristics for mapping a class of independent tasks onto heterogeneous distributed computing systems [J]. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 2001, 61(6): 810–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    KIM J K, SHIVLE S, SIEGEL H J. Dynamic mapping in a heterogeneous environment with tasks having priorities and multiple deadlines [C]// Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, Washington D C: IEEE Computer Society, 2003: 98–110.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    SHETTY S, PADALA P, FRANK M P. A survey of market-based approaches to distributed computing [R]. Gainesville: Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering, University of Florida, 2003: 3–7.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    VENUGOPAL S, BUYYA R. A deadline and budget constrained scheduling algorithm for science applications on data grids [C]// 6th International Conference on Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing (ICA3PP-2005). Melbourne: Springer, 2005: 60–72.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    FENG Hao-lin, SONG Gang-hua, ZHENG Yao, XIA Jun. A deadline and budget constrained cost-time optimization algorithm for scheduling dependent tasks in grid computing [C]// Second International Workshop on Grid and Coorperative Computing. Shanghai: Springer, 2003: 113–120.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    SINGH G, KESSELMAN C, DEELMAN E. A provisioning model and its comparison with best-effort for performance-cost optimization in grids [C]// Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing. California: ACM Press, 2007: 117–126.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    WIECZOREK M, PODLIPNIG S, PRODAN R, FAHRINGER T. Bi-criteria scheduling of scientific workflows for the Grid [C]// Cluster Computing and the Grid 2008. Lyon: IEEE Cpmputer Society, 2008: 9–16.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    BUYYA R, MURSHED M, ABRAMSON D, VENUGOPAL S. Scheduling parameter sweep applications on global grids: A deadline and budget constrained cost-time optimization algorithm [J]. Software: Practice and Experience, 2005, 35(5): 491–512.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    GARG S, BUYYA R, SIEGEL H J. Scheduling parallel applications on utility grids: Time and cost trade-off management [C]// Proceedings of the 32nd Australasian Computer Science Conference (ACSC 2009). Wellington: Australian Computer Society, 2009: 151–159.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    ARMSTRONG R. Investigation of effect of different run-time distribution on smart net performance [D]. Monterey: Department of Computer Science, Naval Postgraduate School, 1997: 82–88.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    RANGANATHAN K, FOSTER I. Simulation studies of computation and data scheduling algorithms for data grids [J]. Journal of Grid Computing, 2006, 1(1): 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    JITHESH P V, KELLY N, SIMPSON D R. Bioinformatics application integration and management in GeneGrid: experiments and experiences [C]// All Hands Meeting (AHM2004), Nottingham, UK: Jhon Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2004: 91–99.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    JANG S, TAYLOR V, WU X, PRAJUGO M, DEEL-MAN E, MEHTA G, VAHI K. Performance prediction-based versus load-based site selection: quantifying the difference [C]// Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems. Las Vegas: ACTA Press, 2005: 101–110.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    BUYYA R, MURSHED M. GridSim: A toolkit for the modeling and simulation of distributed resource management and scheduling for Grid computing [J]. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2002, 14(15): 1175–1220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    SPEC. SPEC CPU2000 Results [EB/OL]. [2009-07-30]. https://doi.org/www.specbench.org/osg/cpu2006/results/cpu2006.html.

Copyright information

© Central South University Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yong Wang (王勇)
    • 1
    Email author
  • R. M. Bahati
    • 2
  • M. A. Bauer
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceChina University of GeosciencesWuhanChina
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Western OntarioOntarioCanada

Personalised recommendations