Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of non-work-conserving processor partitioning policies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing (JSSPP 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 949))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In multiprocessor systems, a reasonable goal of the scheduler is to keep all processors as busy as possible. One technique for doing this is to allocate all available processors to the jobs waiting for service. Techniques which allocate all available processors are known as work-conserving policies. In this paper, non-work-conserving policies are examined. These policies keep some number of processors idle (i.e., unallocated) even when there are parallel jobs that are waiting for service. Such non-work-conserving policies set aside idle processors for anticipated new job arrivals or for unexpected system behavior. Two classes of non-work-conserving space-sharing policies are examined. One policy class keeps a certain percentage of the processors free. The other policy class makes an allocation decision based on previously observed system behavior. Two non-work-conserving policies, each selected from the two classes, are evaluated against their work-conserving counterparts. It is demonstrated that non-work-conserving policies can be particularly useful when the workload or the system behavior are irregular. Variability in the workload behavior including bursty arrivals, a high coefficient of variation in the workload execution time, unstable systems with processor failures are among the situations where non-work-conserving policies improve performance.

This work was partially supported by Italian M.U.R.S.T. 40% and 60% projects, and by sub-contract 19X-SL131V from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory managed by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract no. DE-AC05-84OR21400.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. R. Agrawal, R.K. Mansharamani, M.K. Vernon, “Response time bounds for parallel processor allocation policies,” Technical Report # 1152, Computer Science Dept., Univeristy of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, June 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  2. S.-H. Chiang, R.K. Mansharamani, M.K. Vernon, “Use of application characteristics and limited preemption for run-to-completion parallel processor scheduling policies,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1994, pp. 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  3. D.L. Eager, J. Zahorjan, E.D. Lazowska, “Speedup versus efficiency in parallel systems,” IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol 38(3), March 1989, pp. 408–423.

    Google Scholar 

  4. K. Dussa, B.M. Carlson, L.W. Dowdy, K.-H. Park, “Dynamic partitioning in a transputer environment,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1990, pp. 203–213.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D.G. Feitelson, L. Rudolph, “Distributed hierarchical control for parallel processing,” IEEE Computer, Vol 23(5), May 1990, pp. 65–77.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Ghosal, G. Serazzi, S.K. Tripathi, “Processor working set and its use in scheduling multiprocessor systems,” IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, Vol 17(5), May 1991, pp. 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Gupta, A. Tucker, S. Urushibara, “The impact of operating system scheduling policies and synchronization methods on the performance of parallel applications,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1991, pp. 120–132.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Intel Corporation, Paragon OSF/1 User's Guide, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. L. Kleinrock, Queueing Systems, Vol 1, Wiley Interscience, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S.T. Leutenegger, M.K. Vernon, “The performance of multiprogrammed multiprocessor scheduling policies,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1990, pp. 226–236.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Majumdar, D.L. Eager, R.B. Bunt, “Scheduling in multiprogrammed parallel systems,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1988, pp. 104–113.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. Majumdar, D.L. Eager, R. B. Bunt, “Characterization of programs for scheduling in multiprogrammed parallel systems,” Performance Evaluation, Vol 13(2), 1991, pp. 109–130.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. McCann, R. Vaswani, J. Zahorjan, “A dynamic processor allocation policy for multiprogrammed shared memory multiprocessors,” ACM Trans. on Computer Systems, Vol 11(2), February 1993, pp. 146–178.

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. McCann, J. Zahorjan, “Processor allocation policies for message-passing parallel computers,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1994, pp. 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Ousterhout, “Scheduling techniques for concurrent systems,” Proc. 3rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1982, pp. 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  16. K.-H. Park, L.W. Dowdy, “Dynamic partitioning of multiprocessor systems,” International Journal of Parallel Programming, Vol 18(2), 1989, pp. 91–120.

    Google Scholar 

  17. E. Rosti, E. Smirni, L.W. Dowdy, G. Serazzi, B.M. Carlson, “Robust partitioning policies for multiprocessor systems,” Performance Evaluation, Vol 19(2–3), March 1994, pp. 141–165.

    Google Scholar 

  18. S.K. Setia, M.S. Squillante, S.K. Tripathi, “Processor scheduling in multiprogrammed, distributed memory parallel computers,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1993, pp. 158–170.

    Google Scholar 

  19. K.C. Sevcik, “Characterization of parallelism in applications and their use in scheduling,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1989, pp. 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  20. K.C. Sevcik, “Application scheduling and processor allocation in multiprogrammed multiprocessors,” Performance Evaluation, Vol 19(2–3), March 1994, pp. 107–140.

    Google Scholar 

  21. E. Smirni, E. Rosti, L.W. Dowdy, G. Serazzi, “Evaluation of multiprocessor allocation policies,” Tech. Report, Computer Science Dept., Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, August 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. Smirni, E. Rosti, G. Serazzi, L.W. Dowdy, K.C. Sevcik, “Performance gains from leaving idle processors in multiprocessor systems,” to appear in International Conference on Parallel Processing.

    Google Scholar 

  23. A. Tucker, A. Gupta, “Process control and scheduling issues for multiprogrammed shared-memory multiprocessors,” Proc. of the 12th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, 1989, pp. 159–166.

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. Zahorjan, C. McCann, “Processor scheduling in shared memory multiprocessors,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1990, pp. 214–225.

    Google Scholar 

  25. S. Zhou, T. Brecht, “Processor pool-based scheduling for large-scale NUMA multiprocessors,” Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS, 1991, pp. 133–142.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Informazione, Università di Milano, Italy

    E. Rosti

  2. Department of Computer Science, Vanderibilt Univeristy, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA

    E. Smirni & L. W. Dowdy

  3. Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informazione, Politecnico di Milano, Italy

    G. Serazzi

Authors
  1. E. Rosti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Smirni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Serazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. L. W. Dowdy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Dror G. Feitelson Larry Rudolph

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Rosti, E., Smirni, E., Serazzi, G., Dowdy, L.W. (1995). Analysis of non-work-conserving processor partitioning policies. In: Feitelson, D.G., Rudolph, L. (eds) Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing. JSSPP 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 949. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60153-8_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60153-8_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60153-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49459-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation