Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biased random walks on resource network graphs for load balancing

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The currently emerging large-scale complex networks and networks of networks are becoming apparent in the pervasive supply of seamless and transparent access to heterogeneous resources and services such as network domains, applications, services and storage owned by multiple organizations. The dynamics and heterogeneous environments involved, however, pose many challenges for controlling and balancing resource access, composition and deployment across complex grid and network infrastructures. In this paper, a scheme is proposed that gives a distributed load-balancing scheme by generating almost regular resource allocation networks. This network system is self-organized and depends only on local information for load distribution and resource discovery. The in-degree of each node refers to its free resources, and the job assignment and resource discovery processes required for load-balancing are accomplished by using fitted random sampling. Simulation results show that the generated network system provides an effective, scalable, and reliable load-balancing scheme for the distributed resources in grids and networks. The proposed solution is tested with real world data and the performance is tested against a recently reported distributed algorithm for load balancing.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ruggaber R (2007) Internet of services SAP research vision. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE international workshops on enabling technologies: infrastructure for collaborative enterprises, 2007 (WETICE 2007), p 3

  2. Lüling R, Monien B, Ramme F (1991) A study of dynamic load balancing algorithms. In: Proceedings of the third IEEE SPDP, pp 686–689

  3. Mitzenmacher M (2001) The power of two choices in randomized load balancing. In: IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst, 12(10)

  4. Casavant T, Kuhl J (1988) A taxonomy of scheduling in general-purpose distributed computing systems. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 14(2):141–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hendrickson B, Devine K (2000) Dynamic load balancing in computational mechanics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 184:485–500

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Aversa R, Di Martino B, Mazzocca N, Venticinque S (2006) MAGDA: A Mobile Agent based Grid Architecture. J Grid Comput 4(4):395–412

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Shen H, Xu C-Z (2007) Locality-aware and churn-resilient load-balancing algorithms in structured peer-to-peer networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 18(6):849–862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kashyap A, Basar T, Srikant R (2007) Quantized consensus. Automatica 43(7):1192–1203

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Berenbrink P, Friedetzky T, Hu Z (2009) A new analytical method for parallel, diffusion-type load balancing. J Parallel Distrib Comput 69(1):54–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kremien O, Kramer J (1992) Methodical analysis of adaptive load sharing algorithms. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 3(6):747–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Erdös P, Rényi A (1960) On the evolution of random graphs. Publ Math Inst Hung Acad Sci 5:17–61

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. PingER (2005) PingER: The Internet End-to-end Performance Measurement (IEPM) project. URL: http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/pinger/

  13. Abramowitz M, Stegun IA (1972) Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables, 9th edn. Dover Publications, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Newman MEJ, Park J (2003) Phys Rev 68

  15. Albert R, Jeong H, Barabási AL (1999) Diameter of the world wide web. Nature 401(6749):130–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lehmann S, Jackson AD, Lautrup B (2005) Life, death and preferential attachment. Europhys Lett

  17. Sarshar N, Boykin PO, Roychowdhury V (2004) In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on peer-to-peer computing, pp 2–9

  18. Lov’asz L, Winkler P (1995) Mixing of random walks and other diffusions on a graph. In: Surveys in combinatorics. London mathematical society lecture note series, vol 218. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 119–154

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Distributed management task force, CIM Policy Model, v2.8

  20. Kleinrock L (1975) Queuing systems. Volume I. Theory. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Adabala S, Chadha V, Chawla P, Figueiredo R, Fortes J (2005) From virtualized resources to virtual computing grids: the in-vigo system. Future Gener Comput Syst 21(6):896–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schantz RE, Schmidt DC (2001) Middleware for distributed systems: evolving the common structure for network-centric applications. In: Encyclopaedia of software engineering. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Di Nitto E, Dubois DJ, Mirandola R, Saffre F, Tateson R (2008) Applying self-aggregation to load balancing: experimental results. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on bio-inspired models of network, information and computing systems (Bionetics 2008), Article 14, 25–28 November, 2008

  24. Tian Hi, Shen H, Matsuzawa T (2005) Random walk routing for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on parallel and distributed computing applications and technologies, USA

  25. Servetto S, Barrenechea G (2002) Constrained random walks on random graphs; Routing algorithms for large scale wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. of 1st ACM international workshop on wireless sensor networks and applications

  26. Kunz T (1991) The influence of different workload descriptions on a heuristic load balancing scheme. IEEE Trans Softw Eng, pp 1327–1341

  27. Shivaratri N, Krueger P, Singhal M (1992) Load distributing for locally distributed systems. IEEE Comput 33–44

  28. Ferrari D, Zhou S (1987) An empirical investigation of load indices for load balancing applications. Technical report. University of California, Berkeley

  29. Becker W, Waldmann G (1994) Exploiting inter-task dependencies for dynamic load balancing. In: IEEE 3rd int. symposium on high performance distributed computing. San Francisco, California

  30. Monien B (1996) Load balancing driven process migration. In: EURO-PAR’96, Lyon, France

  31. Xu C, Lüling R, Monien B, Lau FCM (1995) An analytical comparison of nearest neighbours algorithms for load balancing in parallel computers. In: The 9th international parallel processing symposium, Paderborn, Germany

  32. Zhou S (1988) A trace-driven simulation study of dynamic load balancing. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 14(9):1327–1341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lin H, Raghavendra C (1992) A dynamic load-balancing policy with a central job dispatcher (LBC). IEEE Trans Softw Eng 18(2):148–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Li Feng DY, Wu H, Zhang Y (2000) A dynamic load balancing algorithm based on distributed database system. In: Proc. 4th intl. conf. on high performance computing in the Asia-Pacific region, Beijing, China, pp 949–952

  35. Braun TD (2001) A comparison of eleven static heuristics for mapping a class of independent tasks onto heterogeneous distributed computing systems. J Parallel Distrib Comput 61(6):810–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jackson D, Snell Q, Clement M (2001) Core algorithms of the Maui scheduler. In: Proceedings of 7th workshop on job scheduling strategies for parallel processing (Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001). Lecture notes computer science, vol 2221, pp 87–102

  37. Litzkow M, Livny M, Mutka M (1988) Condor—a hunter of idle workstations. In: Proceedings of 8th international conference on distributed computing systems (ICDCS’88), San Jose, CA, USA, 1988, pp 104–111

  38. Henderson RL (1995) Job scheduling under the portable batch system. In: Proceeding of 1st workshop on job scheduling strategies for parallel processing, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 1995. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 949, pp 279–294

  39. Foster I, Kesselman C (1997) Globus: a metacomputing infrastructure toolkit. Int J High Perform Comput Appl 2:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Frey J, Tannenbaum T, Livny M, Foster I, Tuecke S (2002) CondorG: a computation management agent for multi-institutional grids. Cluster Comput 5(3):237–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhuge H (2004) Semantics, resource and grid. Future Gen Comput Syst 20(1):1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Abramson D, Giddy J, Kotler L (2000) High performance parametric modeling with Nimrod/G: killer application for the global grid. In: Proceedings of the IPDPS‘00, Cancun, Mexico, 2000

  43. Grimshaw WA (1997) The legion vision of a worldwide virtual computer. Commun ACM 40(1):39–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Grimshaw WA (2004) The legion vision of a worldwide virtual computer. Intell Syst 19(1):13–17

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Cao J, Spooner DP, Jarvis SA, Nudd GR (2005) Grid load balancing using intelligent agents. Future Gen Comput Syst 21(1):135–149. Special issue on intelligent grid environments: principles and applications

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nudd GR, Kerbyson DJ, Papaefstathiou E, Perry SC, Harper JS, Wilcox DV (2000) PACE—A toolset for the performance prediction of parallel and distributed systems. Int J High Perform Comput Appl 14(3):228–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Albert R, Barabási AL (2002) Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Rev Mod Phys 74(1):47–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Cybenko G (1989) Dynamic load balancing for distributed memory multiprocessors. J Parallel Distrib Comput 7(2):279–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Saffre F, Tateson R, Halloy J, Shackleton M, Deneubourg JL (2008) Aggregation dynamics in overlay networks and their implications for self-organized distributed applications. Comput J, March 31st, 2008

  50. Di Nitto E, Dubois DJ, Mirandola R (2007) Self-aggregation algorithms for autonomic systems. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on bio-inspired models of network, information and computing systems (Bionetics 2007), 10–12 Dec. 2007, pp 120–128

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK

    M. Randles, O. Abu-Rahmeh, P. Johnson & A. Taleb-Bendiab

Authors
  1. M. Randles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O. Abu-Rahmeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Taleb-Bendiab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Randles.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Randles, M., Abu-Rahmeh, O., Johnson, P. et al. Biased random walks on resource network graphs for load balancing. J Supercomput 53, 138–162 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-009-0366-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-009-0366-6

Search

Navigation