Advertisement

A dynamic algorithm for online scheduling of parallel processes

  • Constantinos V. Papadopoulos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 817)

Abstract

We study the following general online scheduling problem. Parallel jobs arrive dynamically according to the dependencies between them. Each job requests a certain number of processors with a specific communication configuration, but its running time is not known until it is completed. We present optimal online algorithms for PRAMs, hypercubes and one — dimensional meshes, and obtain optimal tradeoffs between the competitive ratio and the largest number of processors requested by any job. Our work shows that for efficient online scheduling it is necessary to use virtualization, i.e., to schedule parallel jobs on fewer processors than requested while preserving the work. We prove that tree constraints are complete for the scheduling problem, i.e., any algorithm that solves the scheduling problem if the dependency graph is a tree can be converted to solve the general problem equally efficiently. This shows that the structure of a dependency graph is not as important for online scheduling as it is for offline scheduling, although even simple dependencies make the problem much harder than scheduling independent jobs.

Keywords

scheduling dependencies parallel computing parallel jobs virtualization online algorithms competitive analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. (1).
    S. N. Bhatt, F.R.K. Chung, j-W.Hong, F.T. Leighton, and A.L. Rosenberg. Optimal simulations by butterfly networks. In STOC, pages 192–204. ACM, 1988.Google Scholar
  2. (2).
    G.E Blelloch. Vector for Data-Parallel Computing. MIT-Press, Cambridge MA, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    E. Davis and J.M. Jaffe. Algorithm for scheduling tasks in unrelated processors. JACM, pages 712–736, 1981.Google Scholar
  4. (4).
    F. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph. Wasted resources in gang scheduling. In Proc. of the 5th Jerusalem Conference on Information Technology, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. (5).
    A. Feldmann, J. Sgall, and S.-H Teng. Dynamic scheduling on parallel machine. In FOCS, pages 111–120, IEEE, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. (6).
    M.R. Garey nad D. S. Johnson. Computer and intractability: a guide to the theory of NP-completeness. Freeman, San Francisco, 1979.Google Scholar
  7. (7).
    R.L Graham, Bounds for certain multiprocessor anomalies. Bell system Technical Jouranl, pages 1563–1581, 1966.Google Scholar
  8. (8).
    K. Hwang and F. A. Briggs. Computer Architecture and Parallel Processing. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1984.Google Scholar
  9. (9).
    S.R. Kosaraju and M.j. Atallah. Optimal simulation between mesh-connected arrays of processors. In STOC, pages 264–272. ACM. 1986.Google Scholar
  10. (10).
    H.T. Kung. Computational Models for Parallel Computers. Techical report, CMU-CS-88-164, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. (11).
    J. L. Peterson and A. Silberschatz. Operating system Concepts. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1985.Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    D.D Sleator and R.E. Tarjan. Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules. CACM, 28(2): 202–208, 1985.Google Scholar
  13. (13).
    D. B Shamoys, J. Wein, and D.P Williamson. Scheduling parallel machines on-line. In FOCS, pages 131–140, 1991, IEEE.Google Scholar
  14. (14).
    Q. Wang and K.H Cheng a Heuristic of scheduling Parallel Tasks and its Analysis. SIAM journal on computing, pages 281–294, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Constantinos V. Papadopoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PiraeusGreece

Personalised recommendations