Advertisement

Methods for virtual machine scheduling with uncertain execution times in cloud computing

  • Haiyan XuEmail author
  • Xiaoping Li
Original Article
  • 155 Downloads

Abstract

Execution times are crucial for effectiveness of tasks or jobs scheduling. It is very hard to accurately estimate execution times because they are influenced by many factors. Though there are some models for traditional machine scheduling problems, no attention has been paid on virtual machine scheduling in cloud computing. Based on cloud agent (VM administrator, scheduler or intelligent procedure) experiences, we develop integrated learning effects models to obtain accurate execution times. Based on the constructed learning effects model for single virtual machine scheduling, optimal schedule rules are proposed for minimizing makespan, the total completion time and the sum of (square) completion times. Problems with the total weighted completion time and the maximum lateness minimization are proved to be optimally solvable in polynomial time only for certain assumptions. Furthermore, we adapt the developed learning effects model to two special m-virtual machine MapReduce scenarios, for which optimal schedule rules are introduced correspondingly. Optimal solutions are demonstrated by examples of the problems under study using the constructed rules.

Keywords

Cloud computing Scheduling Mapreduce Learning effects 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos.: 61572127, 61272377, 61375121), the Key Research and Development program in Jiangsu Province (no. BE2015728) and Collaborative Innovation Center of Wireless Communications Technology.

References

  1. 1.
    Shao X, Li X, Gao L, Zhang C (2009) Integration of process planning and scheduling—a modified genetic algorithm-based approach. Comput Oper Res 36(6):2082–2096zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li Y, Liu C, Gao JX, Shen W (2015) An integrated feature-based dynamic control system for on-line machining, inspection and monitoring. Integr Comput Aided Eng 22(2):187–200Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang SY, Wang L (2016) An estimation of distribution algorithm-based memetic algorithm for the distributed assembly permutation flow-shop scheduling problem. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 46(1):139–149Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pan QK (2016) An effective co-evolutionary artificial bee colony algorithm for steelmaking-continuous casting scheduling. Eur J Oper Res 250(3):702–714MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pan QK, Sang HY, Duan JH, Gao L (2014) An improved fruit fly optimization algorithm for continuous function optimization problems. Knowl Based Syst 62(5):69–83Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Han D, Liang H, Shen X, Yang L (2014) Subscriber dynamic characteristics-based wireless network accessing bandwidth prediction. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 5(6):875–885Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li X, Cai Z (2015) Elastic resource provisioning for cloud workflow applications. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng:1–16Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fuhui W, Qingbo W, Tan Y (2015) Workflow scheduling in cloud: a survey. J Supercomput 71(9):3373–3418Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu X, Li X (2015) Iterative search method for total flowtime minimization no-wait flowshop problem. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 6(5):747–761Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhu J, Li X (2016) Scheduling for multi-stage applications with scalable virtual resources in cloud computing. Int J Mach Learn Cybern:1–9Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sun G, Shen J (2016) Towards organizing smart collaboration and enhancing teamwork performance: a ga-supported system oriented to mobile learning through cloud-based online course. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 7(3):391–409Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pinedo M (2012) Scheduling: theory, algorithms, and systems. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Biskup D (1999) Single-machine scheduling with learning considerations. Eur J Oper Res 115(1):173–178MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Byun E-K, Kee Y-S, Kim J-S, Deelman E, Maeng S (2011) Bts: resource capacity estimate for time-targeted science workflows. J Parallel Distrib Comput 71(6):848–862Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Biskup D (2008) A state-of-the-art review on scheduling with learning effects. Eur J Oper Res 188(2):315–329MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng TCE, Kuo WH, Yang DL (2013) Scheduling with a position-weighted learning effect based on sum-of-logarithm-processing-times and job position. Inf Sci 221(2):490–500MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cheng TCE, Wu CC, Lee WC (2008) Some scheduling problems with sum-of-processing-times-based and job-position-based learning effects. Inf Sci 178(11):2476–2487MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kuo WH, Yang DL (2006) Minimizing the total completion time in a single-machine scheduling problem with a time-dependent learning effect. Eur J Oper Res 174(2):1184–1190MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rustogi K, Strusevich VA (2014) Combining time and position dependent effects on a single machine subject to rate-modifying activities. Omega 42(1):166C178Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koulamas C, Kyparisis GJ (2007) Single-machine and two-machine flowshop scheduling with general learning functions. Eur J Oper Res 178(2):402–407MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Qian J, Steiner G (2013) Fast algorithms for scheduling with learning effects and time-dependent processing times on a single machine. Eur J Oper Res 225(3):547MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee W-C, Chin-Chia W (2009) Some single-machine and \(m\)-machine flowshop scheduling problems with learning considerations. Inf Sci 179(22):3885–3892MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chin-Chia W, Lee W-C (2008) Single-machine scheduling problems with a learning effect. Appl Math Model 32(7):1191–1197MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shen L, Yu-Bin W (2013) Single machine past-sequence-dependent delivery times scheduling with general position-dependent and time-dependent learning effects. Appl Math Model 37(7):5444–5451MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang X-Y, Zhou Z, Zhang X, Ji P, Wang J-B (2013) Several flow shop scheduling problems with truncated position-based learning effect. Comput Oper Res 40(12):2906–2929MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li G, Wang X-Y, Wang J-B, Sun L-Y (2013) Worst case analysis of flow shop scheduling problems with a time-dependent learning effect. Int J Prod Econ 142(1):98–104Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang J-B, Wang J-J (2014) Flowshop scheduling with a general exponential learning effect. Comput Oper Res 43:292–308MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee W-C, Chung Y-H (2013) Permutation flowshop scheduling to minimize the total tardiness with learning effects. Int J Prod Econ 141(1):327–334Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haitao L, Aihong G, Mingmao H (2015) An optimal control method for fuzzy supplier switching problem. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 6(4):651–654Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yang DL, Cheng TCE, Kuo WH (2013) Scheduling with a general learning effect. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67(1):217–229Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Public Basic Course, Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Science and Smart SoftwareJinLing Institute of TechnologyNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations