Equivalence, Insensitivity and Monotonicity Properties
Equivalence, insensitivity and monotonicity are important properties of queueing network models that can be used in system performance comparison and evaluation. Insensitivity and equivalence properties provide the basis for comparing the performance of system models with different parameters and with different blocking mechanisms. These results can be applied, for example, to study the impact of the blocking type on system performance, by considering a given set of performance indices and network parameters. In particular, equivalences allow us to define more efficient algorithms to evaluate queueing networks with blocking and to extend the class of models that can be analyzed through analytical methods. Insensitivity properties lead to the identification of the factor that affect system performance and in certain cases it allow a generalization of solution methods. Some important consequence of these properties is that solution methods and algorithms already defined for a certain class of networks could be extended to other classes of networks with different blocking types and/or network parameters. For example, equivalence between networks with and without blocking immediately leads to the extension of efficient computational solution algorithms defined for BCMP networks such as MVA and Convolution algorithm to queueing networks with finite capacity queues. Monotonicity provides insights in the system behavior represented by the queueing network models.
KeywordsMonotonicity Property Blocking Type Equivalence Property Queueing Network Closed Network
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Adan, I., and J. Van Der Wal “Monotonicity of the throughput in single server production and assembly networks with respect to the buffer size” in Queueing Networks with Blocking (H.G. Perros and T. Altiok Eds.), Elsevier, 1989, 325–344.Google Scholar
- Akyildiz, I.F., and N. Van Dijk “Exact Solution for Networks of Parallel Queues with Finite Buffers” in Performance ’90 (P.J. King 40, I. Mitrani and R.J. Pooley Eds.) North-Holland, 1990, 35–49.Google Scholar
- Balsamo, S., and L. Donatiello “Two-stage Queueing Networks with Blocking: Cycle Time Distribution and Equivalence Properties”, in Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation, (R. Puigjaner, D. Potier Eds.), Plenum Press, 1989.Google Scholar
- Balsamo, S., and G. Iazeolla “Some Equivalence Properties for Queueing Networks with and without Blocking”, in Performance ’83 (A.K. Agrawala, S.K. Tripathi Eds.) North Holland, 1983.Google Scholar
- Christofides, N. Graph Theory — An Algorithmic Approach. Academic Press, London, 1975.Google Scholar
- Dallery, Y., Z. Liu, and D.F. Towsley “Equivalence, reversibility, symmetry and concavity properties in fork/join queueing networks with blocking” Techn, Report, MASI.90.32, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France, June, 1990 and J. of the ACM, Vol. 41 (1994) 903–942.Google Scholar
- Dallery, Y., Z. Liu, and D.F. Towsley “Properties of fork/join queueing networks with blocking under various blocking mechanisms” Techn, Report, MASI.92, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France, April, 1992.Google Scholar
- De Nitto Personè, V., and D. Grillo “Managing Blocking in Finite Capacity Symmetrical Ring Networks” Third Int. Conf. on Data Comm. Systems and their Performance, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 22–25 (1987) 225–240.Google Scholar
- Reed D.A., and D.C. Grunwald “The performance of Multicomputer Interconnection Networks” Computer, (1987) 63–73.Google Scholar
- Shantikumar, G.J., and D.D. Yao “Monotonicity properties in cyclic networks with finite buffers” Proc. First Int. Workshop on Queueing Networks with Blocking, (H.G. Perros and T. Altiok Eds.) North Holland, 1989.Google Scholar
- Van Dijk, N.M., and H.C. Tijms “Insensitivity in Two Node Blocking Models with Applications” in Teletraffic Analysis and Computer Performance Evaluation (Boxma, Cohen and Tijms Eds.), Elsevier Science Publishers, North Holland, 1986, 329–340.Google Scholar