Advertisement

Heuristic strategies for preference-based scheduling in virtual organizations of utility grids

  • Victor Toporkov
  • Anna Toporkova
  • Alexey Tselishchev
  • Dmitry YemelyanovEmail author
  • Petr Potekhin
Original Research

Abstract

Distributed environments with the users decoupling from resource providers are generally defined as utility Grids. This paper focuses on the problems of an efficient scheduling in virtual organizations (VOs) of utility Grids. The proposed scheduling model ensures the VO stakeholders preferences and provides strategies for effective resources utilization. An approach based on the combination of the cyclic scheduling scheme, backfilling and several heuristic procedures is proposed and studied. Comparative simulation results are introduced for different algorithms and heuristics. Resource domain composition and heterogeneity as well as the VO pricing policy are taken into account. Considered scheduling approaches provide different benefits depending on the VO scheduling objectives. The results justify the use of the proposed approaches in a broad range of the resource environment parameters.

Keywords

Scheduling Distributed computing Job Batch Optimization Resource Utilization Backfilling 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the Council on Grants of the President of the Russian Federation for State Support of Young Scientists and Leading Scientific Schools (grants SS-362.2014.9, YPhD-4148.2015), the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 15-07-02259, 15-07-03401), and by the Ministry on Education and Science of the Russian Federation, task no. 2014/123 (project no. 2268).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Aida K, Casanova H (2008) Scheduling mixed-parallel applications with advance reservations. In: 17th IEEE International Symposium on HPDC, IEEE, New York, USA, pp 65–74Google Scholar
  2. Ando S, Aida K (2007) Evaluation of scheduling algorithms for advance reservations. Inf Process Soc Japan SIG Notes 113:37–42Google Scholar
  3. Azzedin F, Maheswaran M, Arnason N (2004) A synchronous co-allocation mechanism for Grid computing systems. Cluster Comput 7:39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanco H, Guirado F, Lrida J, Albornoz V (2012) MIP model scheduling for multi-clusters. Euro-Par 2012. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 196–206Google Scholar
  5. Buyya R, Abramson D, Giddy J (2002) Economic models for resource management and scheduling in Grid computing. J Concurr Comput 14(5):1507–1542zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cafaro M, Mirto M, Aloisio G (2013) Preference-based matchmaking of grid resources with CP-Nets. J Grid Comput 11(2):211–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Castillo C, Rouskas G, Harfoush K (2009) Resource co-allocation for large-scale distributed environments. In: 18th ACM international symposium on high performance distributed compuing. ACM, New York, USA, pp 137–150Google Scholar
  8. Elmroth E, Tordsson J (2009) A standards-based grid resource brokering service supporting advance reservations, coallocation and cross-grid interoperability. J Concurr Comput 25(18):2298–2335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ernemann C, Hamscher V, Yahyapour R (2002) Economic scheduling in Grid computing. In: Feitelson D, Rudolph L, Schwiegelshohn U (eds) JSSPP, vol 18. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 128–152Google Scholar
  10. Garg S, Konugurthi P, Buyya R (2011) A linear programming-driven genetic algorithm for meta-scheduling on utility Grids. J Parallel Emergent Dist Syst 26:493–517MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kurowski K, Nabrzyski J, Oleksiak A, Weglarz J (2003) Multicriteria aspects of Grid resource management. In: Nabrzyski J, JM S, Weglarz J (eds) Grid resource management. State of the art and future trends. Kluwer, Boston, MA, pp 271–293Google Scholar
  12. Lee Y, Wang C, Zomaya A, Zhou B (2012) Profit-driven scheduling for cloud services with data access awareness. J Parallel Dist Comput 72(4):591–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Olteanu A, Pop F, Dobre C, Cristea V (2012) A dynamic rescheduling algorithm for resource management in large scale dependable distributed systems. Comput Math Appl 63(9):1409–1423zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rodero I, Villegas D, Bobroff N, Liu Y, Fong L, Sadjadi S (2013) Enabling interoperability among grid meta-schedulers. J Grid Comput 11(2):311–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Takefusa A, Nakada H, Kudoh T, Tanaka Y (2010) An advance reservation-based co-allocation algorithm for distributed computers and network bandwidth on QoS-guaranteed Grids. In: Frachtenberg ESU (ed) JSSPP 2010, vol 6253. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 16–34Google Scholar
  16. Toporkov V, Tselishchev A, Yemelyanov D, Bobchenkov A (2012) Composite scheduling strategies in distributed computing with non-dedicated resources. Proc Comput Sci 9:176–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Toporkov V, Toporkova A, Tselishchev A, Yemelyanov D (2014) Slot selection algorithms in distributed computing. J Supercomput 69(1):53–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Toporkov V, Toporkova A, Tselishchev A, Yemelyanov D, Potekhin P (2015) Core heuristics for preference-based scheduling in virtual organizations of utility Grids. Studies in Computational Intelligence, Springer, Heidelberg 570:321–330Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victor Toporkov
    • 1
  • Anna Toporkova
    • 2
  • Alexey Tselishchev
    • 3
  • Dmitry Yemelyanov
    • 1
    Email author
  • Petr Potekhin
    • 1
  1. 1.National Research University “MPEI”MoscowRussia
  2. 2.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia
  3. 3.European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)Geneva, 23Switzerland

Personalised recommendations