Grid Computing pp 185-196 | Cite as

Comparison Of Centralized And Decentralized Scheduling Algorithms Using GSSIM Simulation Environment

  • Marcin Krystek
  • Krzysztof Kurowski
  • Ariel Oleksiak
  • Krzysztof Rzadca

Various models and architectures for scheduling in grids may be found both in the literature and in practical applications. They differ in the number of scheduling components, their autonomy, general strategies, and the level of decentralization. The major aim of our research is to study impact of these differences on the overall performance of a Grid. To this end, in the paper we compare performance of two specific Grid models: one centralized and one distributed. We use GSSIM simulator to perform accurate empirical tests of algorithms. This paper is a starting point of an experimental study of centralized and decentralized approaches to Grid scheduling within the scope of the CoreGrid Resource Management and Scheduling Institute.


Decentralized scheduling scheduling architecture scheduling algorithms grid GSSIM simulator 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    The gssim portal., 2007.
  2. [2]
    J. Blazewicz. Scheduling in Computer and Manufacturing Systems. Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Buyya, D. Abramson, and S. Venugopal. The grid economy. In Special Issue on Grid Computing, volume 93, pages 698-714. IEEE Press, 2005.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    GridSim Buyya R., Murshed M. A toolkit for the modeling and simulation of distributed resource management and scheduling for grid computing. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 14(13-15):1175-1220, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    L. Eyraud-Dubois, G. Mounie, and D. Trystram. Analysis of scheduling algorithms with reservations. In Proceedings of IPDPS. IEEE Computer Society, 2007.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    D. G. Feitelson, L. Rudolph, and U. Schwiegelshohn. Parallel job scheduling ⣔ a status report. In Proceedings of JSSPP 2004, volume 3277 of LNCS, pages 1-16. Springer, 2005.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    I. Foster. What is the grid., 2002.
  8. [8]
    R.L. Graham. Bounds on multiprocessor timing anomalies. SIAM J. Appl. Math, 17(2), 1969.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    K. Kurowski, J. Nabrzyski, A. Oleksiak, and J. Weglarz. Grid scheduling simulations with gssim. In Proceedings of ICPADS’07. IEEE Computer Society, 2007.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    K. Kurowski, J. Nabrzyski, A. Oleksiak, and J. Weglarz. Multicriteria approach to twolevel hierarchy scheduling in grids. In J. Nabrzyski, J. M. Schopf, and J. Weglarz, editors, Grid resource management: state of the art and future trends, pages 271-293. Kluwer, Norwell, MA, USA, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. Liu, X. Jin, and Y. Wang. Agent-based load balancing on homogeneous minigrids: Macroscopic modeling and characterization. IEEE TPDS, 16(7):586-598, 2005.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    U. Lublin and D. Feitelson. The workload on parallel supercomputers: Modeling the characteristics of rigid jobs. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 11 (63):1105-1122, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    F. Pascual, K. Rzadca, and D. Trystram. Cooperation in multi-organization scheduling. In Proceedings of the Euro-Par 2007, volume 4641 of LNCS. Springer, 2007.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Krystek
    • 1
  • Krzysztof Kurowski
    • 1
  • Ariel Oleksiak
    • 1
  • Krzysztof Rzadca
    • 2
  1. 1.Poznan Supercomputing and Networking CenterPoland
  2. 2.Grenoble UniversityFrance

Personalised recommendations