Rejecting jobs to Minimize Load and Maximum Flow-time

DOI10.1137/1.9781611973730.75MaRDI QIDQ5363003zbMATHOpenAlexFDO

Authors Anamitra R. Choudhury, Syamantak Das, Naveen Garg, Amit Kumar

Publication date 5 October 2017

Published in Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.1839

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Online algorithms; streaming algorithms (68W27) Deterministic scheduling theory in operations research (90B35) Performance evaluation, queueing, and scheduling in the context of computer systems (68M20)

Abstract: Online algorithms are usually analyzed using the notion of competitive ratio which compares the solution obtained by the algorithm to that obtained by an online adversary for the worst possible input sequence. Often this measure turns out to be too pessimistic, and one popular approach especially for scheduling problems has been that of "resource augmentation" which was first proposed by Kalyanasundaram and Pruhs. Although resource augmentation has been very successful in dealing with a variety of objective functions, there are problems for which even a (arbitrary) constant speedup cannot lead to a constant competitive algorithm. In this paper we propose a "rejection model" which requires no resource augmentation but which permits the online algorithm to not serve an epsilon-fraction of the requests. The problems considered in this paper are in the restricted assignment setting where each job can be assigned only to a subset of machines. For the load balancing problem where the objective is to minimize the maximum load on any machine, we give $O(lo{g}^{2}1/eps)$-competitive algorithm which rejects at most an $eps$-fraction of the jobs. For the problem of minimizing the maximum weighted flow-time, we give an $O(1/ep{s}^4)$-competitive algorithm which can reject at most an $eps$-fraction of the jobs by weight. We also extend this result to a more general setting where the weights of a job for measuring its weighted flow-time and its contribution towards total allowed rejection weight are different. This is useful, for instance, when we consider the objective of minimizing the maximum stretch. We obtain an $O(1/ep{s}^6)$-competitive algorithm in this case. Our algorithms are immediate dispatch, though they may not be immediate reject. All these problems have very strong lower bounds in the speed augmentation model.

Recommendations

• Rejecting jobs to minimize load and maximum flow-time
• Scheduling problems with rejection to minimize the maximum flow time
• Scheduling to tradeoff between the number and the length of accepted jobs
• Scheduling with rejection to minimize the total weighted completion time
• Minimizing the number of late jobs on unrelated machines
• Minimizing total load on a proportionate flowshop with position-dependent processing times and job-rejection
• Scheduling to Minimize Maximum Workload
• Scheduling with job-rejection and position-dependent processing times on proportionate flowshops
• Minimizing maximum flowtime of jobs with arbitrary parallelizability
• Minimizing the maximum flow time in batch scheduling

Cited in

(10)

• From preemptive to non-preemptive scheduling using rejections
• Online Non-Preemptive Scheduling to Minimize Weighted Flow-time on Unrelated Machines
• A best possible online algorithm for minimizing the total completion time and the total soft penalty cost
• Minimizing weighted \(\ell_p\)-norm of flow-time in the rejection model
• Non-preemptive flow-time minimization via rejections
• Scheduling for flow-time with admission control
• Minimizing the maximum flow time in the online food delivery problem
• Approximating \(k\)-forest with resource augmentation: a primal-dual approach
• Rejecting jobs to minimize load and maximum flow-time
• Maintaining assignments online: matching, scheduling, and flows

This page was built for publication: Rejecting jobs to Minimize Load and Maximum Flow-time

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q5363003)