Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Task scheduling, resource provisioning, and load balancing on scientific workflows using parallel SARSA reinforcement learning agents and genetic algorithm

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

Abstract

Cloud computing is one of the most popular distributed environments, in which, multiple powerful and heterogeneous resources are used by different user applications. Task scheduling and resource provisioning are two important challenges of cloud environment, called cloud resource management. Resource management is a major problem especially for scientific workflows due to their heavy calculations and dependency between their operations. Several algorithms and methods have been developed to manage cloud resources. In this paper, the combination of state-action-reward-state-action learning and genetic algorithm is used to manage cloud resources. At the first step, the intelligent agents schedule the tasks during the learning process by exploring the workflow. Then, in the resource provisioning step, each resource is assigned to an agent, and its utilization is attempted to be maximized in the learning process of its corresponding agent. This is conducted by selecting the most appropriate set of the tasks that maximizes the utilization of the resource. Genetic algorithm is utilized for convergence of the agents of the proposed method, and to achieve global optimization. The fitness function that has been exploited by this genetic algorithm seeks to achieve more efficient resource utilization and better load balancing by observing the deadlines of the tasks. The experimental results show that the proposed algorithm reduces makespan, enhances resource utilization, and improves load balancing, compared to MOHEFT and MCP, the well-known workflow scheduling algorithms of the literature.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gradwell P, Padget J (2005) Markets vs auctions: approaches to distributed combinatorial resource scheduling. Multiagent Grid Syst 1(4):251–262

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Galstyan A, Czajkowski K, Lerman K (2005) Resource allocation in the grid with learning agents. J Grid Comput 3(1–2):91–100

    Google Scholar 

  3. Yeo CS, Buyya R, Pourreza H, Eskicioglu R, Graham P, Sommers F (2006) Cluster computing: high-performance, high-availability, and high-throughput processing on a network of computers. In: Zomaya AY (ed) Handbook of nature-inspired and innovative computing. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 521–551

    Google Scholar 

  4. Armbrust M, Fox A, Griffith R, Joseph AD, Katz R, Konwinski A, Lee G et al (2010) A view of cloud computing. Commun ACM 53(4):50–58

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hameed A, Khoshkbarforoushha A, Ranjan R, Jayaraman PP, Kolodziej J, Balaji P, Zeadally S et al (2016) A survey and taxonomy on energy efficient resource allocation techniques for cloud computing systems. Computing 98(7):751–774

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Weingärtner R, Bräscher GB, Westphall CB (2015) Cloud resource management: a survey on forecasting and profiling models. J Netw Comput Appl 47:99–106

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kahanwal D, Singh DTP (2013) The distributed computing paradigms: P2P, grid, cluster, cloud, and jungle. arXiv:1311.3070

  8. Gonzalez NM, de Brito Carvalho TCM, Miers CC (2017) Cloud resource management: towards efficient execution of large-scale scientific applications and workflows on complex infrastructures. J Cloud Comput 6(1):13

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jennings B, Stadler R (2015) Resource management in clouds: survey and research challenges. J Netw Syst Manag 23(3):567–619

    Google Scholar 

  10. Arunarani AR, Manjula D, Sugumaran V (2019) Task scheduling techniques in cloud computing: a literature survey. Future Gen Comput Syst 91:407–415

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kalra M, Singh S (2015) A review of metaheuristic scheduling techniques in cloud computing. Egypt Inform J 16(3):275–295

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rodriguez MA, Buyya R (2018) Scheduling dynamic workloads in multi-tenant scientific workflow as a service platforms. Future Gen Comput Syst 79:739–750

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barker A, Van Hemert J (2007) Scientific workflow: a survey and research directions. In: International Conference on Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 746–753

  14. de Carvalho Silva J, de Oliveira Dantas AB, de Carvalho Junior FH (2019) A scientific workflow management system for orchestration of parallel components in a cloud of large-scale parallel processing services. Sci Comput Program 173:95–127

    Google Scholar 

  15. Malawski M, Juve G, Deelman E, Nabrzyski J (2015) Algorithms for cost-and deadline-constrained provisioning for scientific workflow ensembles in IaaS clouds. Future Gen Comput Syst 48:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang Q, Cheng L, Boutaba R (2010) Cloud computing: state-of-the-art and research challenges. J Internet Serv Appl 1(1):7–18

    Google Scholar 

  17. Barto AG, Mahadevan S (2003) Recent advances in hierarchical reinforcement learning. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 13(1–2):41–77

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Davis L (1991) Handbook of genetic algorithms. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Asghari A, Sohrabi MK, Yaghmaee F (2020) Online scheduling of dependent tasks of cloud’s workflows to enhance resource utilization and reduce the makespan using multiple reinforcement learning-based agents. Soft Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04931-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Asghari A, Sohrabi MK, Yaghmaee F (2020) A cloud resource management framework for multiple online scientific workflows using cooperative reinforcement learning agents. Comput Netw. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2020.107340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Xu C-Z, Rao J, Xiangping B (2012) URL: a unified reinforcement learning approach for autonomic cloud management. J Parallel Distrib Comput 72(2):95–105

    Google Scholar 

  22. Duggan M, Duggan J, Howley E, Barrett E (2017) A reinforcement learning approach for the scheduling of live migration from under utilised hosts. Memet Comput 9(4):283–293

    Google Scholar 

  23. Shi B, Zhu H, Yuan H, Shi R, Wang J (2018) Pricing cloud resource based on reinforcement learning in the competing environment. In: International Conference on Cloud Computing. Springer, Cham, pp 158–171

  24. Benifa JVB, Dejey D (2019) RLPAS: reinforcement learning-based proactive auto-scaler for resource provisioning in cloud environment. Mob Netw Appl 24:1348–1363

    Google Scholar 

  25. Orhean AI, Pop F, Raicu I (2018) New scheduling approach using reinforcement learning for heterogeneous distributed systems. J Parallel Distrib Comput 117:292–302

    Google Scholar 

  26. Liu N, Li Z, Xu J, Xu Z, Lin S, Qiu Q, Tang J, Wang Y (2017) A hierarchical framework of cloud resource allocation and power management using deep reinforcement learning. In: 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). IEEE, pp 372–382

  27. Zhang Yu, Yao J, Guan H (2018) Intelligent cloud resource management with deep reinforcement learning. IEEE Cloud Comput 4(6):60–69

    Google Scholar 

  28. Balla HAM, Sheng CG, Weipeng J (2018) Reliability enhancement in cloud computing via optimized job scheduling implementing reinforcement learning algorithm and queuing theory. In: 2018 1st International Conference on Data Intelligence and Security (ICDIS). IEEE, pp 127–130

  29. Peng Z, Cui D, Zuo J, Li Q, Xu B, Lin W (2015) Random task scheduling scheme based on reinforcement learning in cloud computing. Cluster Comput 18(4):1595–1607

    Google Scholar 

  30. Xu Y, Li K, Hu J, Li K (2014) A genetic algorithm for task scheduling on heterogeneous computing systems using multiple priority queues. Inf Sci 270:255–287

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Kwok YK, Ahmad I (1998) Benchmarking the task graph scheduling algorithms. In: Proceedings of the First Merged International Parallel Processing Symposium and Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing. IEEE, pp 531–537

  32. Keshanchi B, Souri A, Navimipour NJ (2017) An improved genetic algorithm for task scheduling in the cloud environments using the priority queues: formal verification, simulation, and statistical testing. J Syst Softw 124:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  33. Liu C-Y, Zou C-M, Wu P (2014) A task scheduling algorithm based on genetic algorithm and ant colony optimization in cloud computing. In: 2014 13th International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science (DCABES). IEEE, pp 68–72

  34. Wu S-y, Zhang P, Li F, Gu F, Pan Y (2016) A hybrid discrete particle swarm optimization-genetic algorithm for multi-task scheduling problem in service oriented manufacturing systems. J Cent South Univ 23(2):421–429

    Google Scholar 

  35. Akbari M, Rashidi H, Alizadeh SH (2017) An enhanced genetic algorithm with new operators for task scheduling in heterogeneous computing systems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 61:35–46

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wang B, Li J (2016) Load balancing task scheduling based on multi-population genetic algorithm in cloud computing. In: 2016 35th Chinese Control Conference (CCC). IEEE, pp 5261–5266

  37. Beegom ASA, Rajasree MS (2015) Genetic algorithm framework for bi-objective task scheduling in cloud computing systems. In: International Conference on Distributed Computing and Internet Technology. Springer, Cham, pp 356–359

  38. Ahmad SG, Liew CS, Munir EU, Ang TF, Khan SU (2016) A hybrid genetic algorithm for optimization of scheduling workflow applications in heterogeneous computing systems. J Parallel Distrib Comput 87:80–90

    Google Scholar 

  39. Page AJ, Keane TM, Naughton TJ (2010) Multi-heuristic dynamic task allocation using genetic algorithms in a heterogeneous distributed system. J Parallel Distrib Comput 70(7):758–766

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Singh S, Chana I (2016) A survey on resource scheduling in cloud computing: issues and challenges. J Grid Comput 14(2):217–264

    Google Scholar 

  41. Manvi SS, Shyam GK (2014) Resource management for Infrastructure as a service (IaaS) in cloud computing: a survey. J Netw Comput Appl 41:424–440

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wu F, Wu Q, Tan Y (2015) Workflow scheduling in cloud: a survey. J Supercomput 71(9):3373–3418

    Google Scholar 

  43. Antonopoulos N, Gillam L (2010) Cloud computing. Springer, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Michalski RS, Carbonell JG, Mitchell TM (eds) (2013) Machine learning: an artificial intelligence approach. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  46. Puterman ML (2014) Markov decision processes: discrete stochastic dynamic programming. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Barto AG, Bradtke SJ, Singh SP (1995) Learning to act using real-time dynamic programming. Artif Intell 72(1–2):81–138

    Google Scholar 

  48. Watkins CJCH (1989) Learning from delayed rewards. Ph.D. Diss., King’s College, Cambridge

  49. Rummery GA (1995) Problem solving with reinforcement learning. Ph.D. Diss., University of Cambridge

  50. Rummery GA, Niranjan M (1994) On-line Q-learning using connectionist systems, vol 37. University of Cambridge, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  51. John GH (1994) When the best move isn’t optimal: Q-learning with exploration. In: AAAI, p 1464

  52. Holland JH (1992) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  53. Konak A, Coit DW, Smith AE (2006) Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91(9):992–1007

    Google Scholar 

  54. Back T (1996) Evolutionary algorithms in theory and practice: evolution strategies, evolutionary programming, genetic algorithms. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  55. Sastry K, Goldberg D, Kendall G (2005) Genetic algorithms. In: Burke EK, Kendall G (eds) Search methodologies. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 97–125

    Google Scholar 

  56. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Ghomi EJ, Rahmani AM, Qader NN (2017) Load-balancing algorithms in cloud computing: a survey. J Netw Comput Appl 88:50–71

    Google Scholar 

  58. Xu M, Tian W, Buyya R (2017) A survey on load balancing algorithms for virtual machines placement in cloud computing. Concurr Comput Pract Exp 29(12):e4123

    Google Scholar 

  59. Corazza M, Sangalli A (2015) Q-learning and SARSA: a comparison between two intelligent stochastic control approaches for financial trading. University Ca’Foscari of Venice, Dept. of Economics Research Paper Series No 15

  60. Beale HD, Demuth HB, Hagan MT (1996) Neural network design. PWS, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  61. Myerson RB (2013) Game theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  62. Chang D-H, Son JH, Kim MH (2002) Critical path identification in the context of a workflow. Inf Softw Technol 44(7):405–417

    Google Scholar 

  63. Tong Z, Deng X, Chen H, Mei J, Liu H (2020) QL-HEFT: a novel machine learning scheduling scheme base on cloud computing environment. Neural Comput Appl 32:5553–5570

    Google Scholar 

  64. Patel P, Ranabahu AH, Sheth AP (2009) Service level agreement in cloud computing. In: Proceeding of international conference on object oriented programming, systems, languages and application (Cloud Workshops at OOPSLA09), Orlando, Florida, USA, October 25–29, 2009, pp 212–217

  65. Calheiros RN, Ranjan R, Beloglazov A, De Rose CAF, Buyya R (2011) CloudSim: a toolkit for modeling and simulation of cloud computing environments and evaluation of resource provisioning algorithms. Softw Pract Exp 41(1):23–50

    Google Scholar 

  66. http://daggenerator.com/#

  67. Rodriguez MA, Buyya R (2017) A taxonomy and survey on scheduling algorithms for scientific workflows in IaaS cloud computing environments. Concurr Comput Pract Exp 29(8):e4041

    Google Scholar 

  68. Durillo JJ, Prodan R (2014) Multi-objective workflow scheduling in Amazon EC2. Cluster Comput 17(2):169–189

    Google Scholar 

  69. Vasile M-A, Pop F, Tutueanu R-I, Cristea V, Kołodziej J (2015) Resource-aware hybrid scheduling algorithm in heterogeneous distributed computing. Future Gen Comput Syst 51:61–71

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran

    Ali Asghari, Mohammad Karim Sohrabi & Farzin Yaghmaee

  2. Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

    Farzin Yaghmaee

Authors
  1. Ali Asghari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Karim Sohrabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Farzin Yaghmaee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Karim Sohrabi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Asghari, A., Sohrabi, M.K. & Yaghmaee, F. Task scheduling, resource provisioning, and load balancing on scientific workflows using parallel SARSA reinforcement learning agents and genetic algorithm. J Supercomput 77, 2800–2828 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-020-03364-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-020-03364-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation