Automation and Remote Control

, Volume 71, Issue 10, pp 2093–2101 | Cite as

Preemptive scheduling of independent jobs on identical parallel machines subject to migration delays

  • S. V. Sevastyanov
  • R. A. Sitters
  • A. V. Fishkin
Multi-Machine and Multi-Stage Scheduling Environments


We present hardness and approximation results for the problem of preemptive scheduling of n independent jobs on m identical parallel machines subject to a migration delay d with the objective to minimize the makespan. We give a sharp threshold on the value of d for which the complexity of the problem changes from polynomial time solvable to NP-hard. Next, we give initial results supporting a conjecture that there always exists an optimal schedule with at most m − 1 job migrations. Finally, we provide a O(n) time (1 + 1/log2 n)-approximation algorithm for m = 2.


Remote Control Completion Time Optimal Schedule Feasible Schedule Communication Delay 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Graham, R.L., Lawler, E.L., Lenstra, J.K., and Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G., Optimization and Approximation in Deterministic Scheduling: A Survey, Ann. Discret. Math., 1979, vol. 5, pp. 287–326.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lawler, E.L., Lenstra, J.K., Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G., and Shmoys, D.B., Sequencing and Scheduling: Algorithms and Complexity, in Logist. Product. Inventory, vol. 4 of Handbooks in Operation Research and Management Science, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1993, pp. 445–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tanaev, V.S., Gordon, V.S., and Shafransky, Ya.N., Teoriya raspisanii. Odnostadiinye sistemy (Theory of Scheduling. Single-stage Systems), Moscow: Nauka, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McNaughton, R., Scheduling with Deadlines and Loss Functions, Manage. Sci., 1959, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–12.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karp, R.M., Reducibility among Combinatorial Problems, in Complexity of Computer Computations, Miller, R.E. and Thatcher, J.W., Eds., New York: Plenum, 1972, pp. 85–103.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rothkopf, M.H., Scheduling Independent Tasks on Parallel Processors, Manage. Sci., 1966, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 437–447.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hochbaum, D.S. and Shmoys, D., A Polynomial Approximation Scheme for Scheduling on Uniform Processors: Using the Dual Approximation Approach, SIAM J. Comput., 1988, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 539–551.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gordon, V.S. and Tanaev, V.S., Interruptions in Deterministic Systems with Parallel Machines and Arbitrary Release Dates, in Optimization of Collecting, Transmitting and Processing the Analogous and Discrete Information in Local ICS, Proc. of the 1st Joint Soviet-bulgarian Workshop of IEC AS BSSR—IEC BAS, Minsk, 1973, pp. 36–50.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tanaev, V.S., Interruptions in Deterministic Service Systems with Identical Parallel Machines, Izv. Akad. Nauk BSSR, Ser. Fiz.-mat. Nauk, 1973, no. 6, pp. 44–48.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hanen, C. and Munier, A., An Approximation Algorithm for Scheduling Dependent Tasks on m Processors with Small Communication Delays, Discret. Appl. Math., 2001, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 239–257.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoogeveen, J.A., Lenstra, J.K., and Veltman, B., Three, Four, Five, Six, or the Complexity of Scheduling with Communication Delays, Oper. Res. Lett., 1994, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 129–137.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schuurman, P. and Woeginger, G.J., Polynomial Time Approximation Algorithms for Machine Scheduling: Ten Open Problems, J. Schedul., 1999, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 203–213.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Engels, D.W., Feldman, J., Karger, D.R., and Ruhl, M., Parallel Processor Scheduling with Delay Constraints, in Proc. of the SODA, Washington, 2001, pp. 577–585.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Afrati, F.N., Bampis, E., Finta, L., and Milis, I., Scheduling Trees with Large Communication Delays on two Identical Processors, J. Schedul., 2005, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 179–190zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Engels, D.W., Scheduling for Hardware-software Partitioning in Embedded System Design, PhD Thesis, Cambridge: Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garey, M.R. and Johnson, D.S., Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-completeness, San Francisco: Freeman, 1979.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blum, M., Floyd, R., Pratt, V., Rivest, R., and Tarjan, R., Time Bounds for Selection, J. Comp. Syst. Sci., 1973.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. V. Sevastyanov
    • 1
  • R. A. Sitters
    • 2
  • A. V. Fishkin
    • 3
  1. 1.Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Siberian BranchRussian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk State UniversityNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Free UniversityAmsterdamNetherlands
  3. 3.Siemens AG Corporate TechnologyMunchenGermany

Personalised recommendations