A Budget Constrained Scheduling Algorithm for Workflow Applications

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.

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

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)

  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)

    Article  Google 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)

    Article  Google 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)

    Article  Google 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)

  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)

  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)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Coffman, E.G., Bruno, J.L: Computer and Job-shop Scheduling Theory. Wiley (1976)

  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)

    Article  Google 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)

    Article  Google 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)

    Article  Google 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)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Pegasus. Pegasus workflow generator. https://confluence.pegasus.isi.edu/display/pegasus/WorkflowGenerator (2013)

  14. 14.

    Prodan, R., Wieczorek, M.: Bi-criteria scheduling of scientific grid workflows. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 7(2), 364–376 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sakellariou, R., Zhao, H., Tsiakkouri, E., Dikaiakos, M.: Scheduling workflows with budget constraints. Integr. Res. Grid Comput., 189–202 (2007)

  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)

  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)

    Article  Google 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)

  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)

    Article  Google 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  28. 28.

    Zheng, W., Sakellariou, R.: Budget-deadline constrained workflow planning for admission control. J. Grid Comput., 1–19 (2013)

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge G. Barbosa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arabnejad, H., Barbosa, J.G. A Budget Constrained Scheduling Algorithm for Workflow Applications. J Grid Computing 12, 665–679 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10723-014-9294-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Utility computing
  • Deadline
  • Quality of Service
  • Planning Success Rate