Resource Allocation Schemes for Gang Scheduling

  • Bing Bing Zhou
  • David Walsh
  • Richard P. Brent
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1911)

Abstract

Gang scheduling is currently the most popular scheduling scheme for parallel processing in a time shared environment. In this paper we .rst describe the ideas of job re-packing and workload tree for e.ciently allocating resources to enhance the performance of gang scheduling. We then present some experimental results obtained by implementing four di.erent resource allocation schemes. These results show how the ideas, such as re-packing jobs, running jobs in multiple slots and minimising the average number of time slots in the system, a.ect system and job performance when incorporated into the buddy based allocation scheme for gang scheduling.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. B. Downey, A parallel workload model and its implications for processor allocation, Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, Aug 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. G. Feitelson, Packing schemes for gang scheduling, In Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph (eds.), Lecture Notes Computer Science, Vol. 1162, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp.89–110.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph, Distributed hierarchical control for parallel processing, Computer, 23(5), May 1990, pp.65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph, Job scheduling for parallel supercomputers, in Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, Vol. 38, Marcel Dekker, Inc, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph, Gang scheduling performance bene.ts for.negrained synchronisation, Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 16(4), Dec. 1992, pp.306–318.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    V. Lo, J. Mache and K. Windisch, A comparative study of real workload traces and synthetic workload models for parallel job scheduling, In Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph (Eds.), Lecture Notes Computer Science, Vol. 1459, Springer-Verlag, 1998, pp.25–46.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. K. Ousterhout, Scheduling techniques for concurrent systems, Proceedings of Third International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, May 1982, pp.20–30.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. L. Peterson and T. A. Norman, Buddy systems, Comm. ACM, 20(6), June 1977, pp.421–431.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Skovira, W. Chan, H. Zhou and D. Lifka, The EASY-LoadLeveler API project, In Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph (Eds.), Lecture Notes Computer Science, Vol. 1162, Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Suzaki, H. Tanuma, S. Hirano, Y. Ichisugi and M. Tukamoto, Time sharing systems that use a partitioning algorithm on mesh-connected parallel computers, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1996, pp.268–275.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. B. Zhou, R. P. Brent, C. W. Johnson and D. Walsh, Job repacking for enhancing the performance of gang scheduling, Proceedings of 5th Workshop on Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, San Juan, April 1999, pp.129–143.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bing Bing Zhou
    • 1
  • David Walsh
    • 2
  • Richard P. Brent
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Computing and MathematicsDeakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  3. 3.Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Wolfson BuildingOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations