PPAM 2007: Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics pp 1059-1067 | Cite as
Tightness Results for Malleable Task Scheduling Algorithms
Conference paper
Abstract
Malleable tasks are a way of modelling jobs that can be parallelized to get a (usually sublinear) speedup. The best currently known approximation algorithms for scheduling malleable tasks with precedence constraints are a) 2.62-approximation for certain classes of precedence constraints such as series-parallel graphs [1], and b) 4.72-approximation for general graphs via linear programming [2]. We show that these rates are tight, i.e. there exist instances that achieve the upper bounds.
Keywords
Execution Time Approximation Algorithm Critical Path Precedence Constraint Fractional Solution
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.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Lepère, R., Trystram, D., Woeginger, G.J.: Approximation algorithms for scheduling malleable tasks under precedence constraints. Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 13(4), 613–627 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 2.Jansen, K., Zhang, H.: An approximation algorithm for scheduling malleable tasks under general precedence constraints. In: Deng, X., Du, D.-Z. (eds.) ISAAC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3827, pp. 236–245. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Skutella, M.: Approximation algorithms for the discrete time-cost tradeoff problem. Technical Report 514/1996, Technische Universität Berlin (1996)Google Scholar
- 4.Du, J., Leung, J.Y.T.: Complexity of scheduling parallel task systems. SIAM J. Disc. Math. 2(4), 473–487 (1989)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 5.Turek, J., Wolf, J.L., Yu, P.S.: Approximate algorithms scheduling parallelizable tasks. In: Proceedings of SPAA 1992, pp. 323–332 (1992)Google Scholar
- 6.Mounie, G., Rapine, C., Trystram, D.: A 3/2-approximation algorithm for scheduling independent monotonic malleable tasks. SIAM J. Comp. 37(2), 401–412 (2007)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Jansen, K.: Scheduling malleable parallel tasks: An asymptotic fully polynomial time approximation scheme. Algorithmica 39(1), 59–81 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 8.Dutot, P.F.: Hierarchical scheduling for moldable tasks. In: Cunha, J.C., Medeiros, P.D. (eds.) Euro-Par 2005. LNCS, vol. 3648, pp. 302–311. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
- 9.Leung, J.Y.T. (ed.): Handbook of Scheduling. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 10.Gonzalez, T.F. (ed.): Handbook of Approximation Algorithms and Metaheuristics. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 11.Graham, R.L., Lawler, E.L., Lenstra, J.K., Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G.: Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: a survey. Annals of Discrete Mathematics 5 (1979)Google Scholar
- 12.Grigoriev, A., Woeginger, G.J.: Project scheduling with irregular costs: complexity, approximability, and algorithms. Acta Informatica 41(2–3), 83–97 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.Schwarz, U.M.: Design and analysis of approximation algorithms for certain scheduling problems. Diploma thesis, University of Kiel (2006)Google Scholar
- 14.Graham, R.L.: Bounds for certain multiprocessor anomalies. Bell Systems Tech. J. 45, 1563–1581 (1966)Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008