Online Load Balancing Made Simple: Greedy Strikes Back
We provide a new simpler approach to the on-line load balancing problem in the case of restricted assignment of temporary weighted tasks. The approach is very general and allows to derive online distributed algorithms whose competitive ratio is characterized by some combinatorial properties of the underlying graph representing the problem.
The effectiveness of our approach is shown by the hierarchical server model introduced by Bar-Noy et al ’99. In this case, our method yields simpler and distributed algorithms whose competitive ratio is at least as good as the existing ones. Moreover, the resulting algorithms and their analysis turn out to be simpler. Finally, in all cases the algorithms are optimal up to a constant factor.
Some of our results are obtained via a combinatorial characterization of those graphs for which our technique yields O(\( \sqrt n \))-competitive algorithms.
KeywordsBipartite Graph Greedy Algorithm Competitive Ratio Task Type Competitive Algorithm
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.S. Albers. Better bounds for on-line scheduling. Proc. of the 29th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 130–139, 1997.Google Scholar
- 2.Y. Azar. On-line load balancing, chapter in “On-line Algorithms-The state of the Art”, A. Fiat and G. Woeginger (eds.). Springer Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
- 4.Y. Azar and L. Epstein. On-line load balancing of temporary tasks on identical machines. Proc. of the 5th Israeli Symposium on Theory of Computing and Systems (ISTCS), pages 119–125, 1997.Google Scholar
- 9.P. Crescenzi, G. Gambosi, and P. Penna. On-line algorithms for the channel assignment problem in cellular networks. In Proc. of the 4th ACM International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing (DIALM), pages 1–7, 2000. Full version to appear in Discrete Applied Mathematics.Google Scholar
- 10.P. Crescenzi, G. Gambosi, and P. Penna. On-line load balancing made simple: Greedy strikes back. Technical report, Università di Salerno, 2003. Electronic version available at http://www.dia.unisa.it/~penna.Google Scholar
- 11.R. Graham. Bounds for certain multiprocessor anomalies. Bell System Technical Journal, 45:1563–1581, 1966.Google Scholar
- 12.R. Graham. Bounds on multiprocessor timing anomalies. SIAM J. Appl. Math., 17:263–269, 1969.Google Scholar
- 13.S. Guha and S. Khuller. Greedy strikes back: Improved facility location algorithms. In ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), 1998.Google Scholar