skip to main content
10.1145/3154979.3154985acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiccctConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Performance Comparison of HEFT, Lookahead, CEFT and PEFT Scheduling Algorithms for Heterogeneous Computing Systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:24 November 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Efficient scheduling algorithms play an essential part in heterogeneous computing systems to achieve high performance. The problem of producing an optimal schedule for the precedence-constrained tasks is recognized to be an NP-complete problem. To work out this problem, the researchers have already been proposed various scheduling algorithms in the literature. This paper discusses four well-known list scheduling algorithms such as HEFT, Lookahead, CEFT and PEFT for heterogeneous computing systems and performs experiments for randomly created application graphs and the application graphs generated from real-world problem for instance molecular dynamic code. The performance of algorithms are evaluated and compared on different scheduling parameters such as scheduling length ratio, efficiency, etc.

References

  1. Hamid Arabnejad and Jorge G Barbosa. 2014. List scheduling algorithm for heterogeneous systems by an optimistic cost table. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 25, 3 (2014), 682--694. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Luiz F Bittencourt, Rizos Sakellariou, and Edmundo RM Madeira. 2010. Dag scheduling using a lookahead variant of the heterogeneous earliest finish time algorithm. In Parallel, Distributed and Network-Based Processing (PDP), 2010 18th Euromicro International Conference on. IEEE, 27--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Menglan Hu, Jun Luo, Yang Wang, and Bharadwaj Veeravalli. 2017. Adaptive Scheduling of Task Graphs with Dynamic Resilience. IEEE Trans. Comput. 66, 1 (2017), 17--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Hidehiro Kanemitsu, Masaki Hanada, and Hidenori Nakazato. 2016. Clustering-based task scheduling in a large number of heterogeneous processors. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 27, 11 (2016), 3144--3157. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Minhaj Ahmad Khan. 2012. Scheduling for heterogeneous systems using constrained critical paths. Parallel Comput. 38, 4 (2012), 175--193. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Yu-Kwong Kwok and Ishfaq Ahmad. 1996. Dynamic critical-path scheduling: An effective technique for allocating task graphs to multiprocessors. IEEE transactions on parallel and distributed systems 7, 5 (1996), 506--521. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Yu-Kwong Kwok and Ishfaq Ahmad. 1999. Static scheduling algorithms for allocating directed task graphs to multiprocessors. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 31, 4 (1999), 406--471. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Christos H Papadimitriou and Mihalis Yannakakis. 1990. Towards an architecture-independent analysis of parallel algorithms. SIAM journal on computing 19, 2 (1990), 322--328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Vivek Sarkar. 1987. Partitioning and scheduling parallel programs for execution on multiprocessors. Technical Report. Stanford Univ., CA (USA). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Zhiao Shi, Emmanuel Jeannot, and Jack J Dongarra. 2006. Robust task scheduling in non-deterministic heterogeneous computing systems. In Cluster Computing, 2006 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Xiaoyong Tang, Kenli Li, Guiping Liao, and Renfa Li. 2010. List scheduling with duplication for heterogeneous computing systems. Journal of parallel and distributed computing 70, 4 (2010), 323--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Haluk Topcuoglu, Salim Hariri, and Min-you Wu. 2002. Performance-effective and low-complexity task scheduling for heterogeneous computing. IEEE transactions on parallel and distributed systems 13, 3 (2002), 260--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. M-Y Wu and Daniel D Gajski. 1990. Hypertool: A programming aid for message-passing systems. IEEE transactions on parallel and distributed systems 1, 3 (1990), 330--343. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Tao Yang and Apostolos Gerasoulis. 1994. DSC: Scheduling parallel tasks on an unbounded number of processors. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 5, 9 (1994), 951--967. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Performance Comparison of HEFT, Lookahead, CEFT and PEFT Scheduling Algorithms for Heterogeneous Computing Systems

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ICCCT-2017: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer and Communication Technology
        November 2017
        157 pages
        ISBN:9781450353243
        DOI:10.1145/3154979

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 24 November 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        ICCCT-2017 Paper Acceptance Rate33of124submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate33of124submissions,27%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader