1999
DOI: 10.1006/jpdc.1999.1576
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Alternatives to Coscheduling a Network of Workstations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
47
6

Year Published

2007
2007
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(52 reference statements)
1
47
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Many papers even make the expedient assumption that all parallel jobs run on all the available nodes [56,57,[65][66][67].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many papers even make the expedient assumption that all parallel jobs run on all the available nodes [56,57,[65][66][67].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As described in [4], [11], CDC schemes can be classified by two components: message waiting action taken by processes waiting for a message and message handling action performed by the kernel when a message arrives (see Table 1). Sobalvarro et al [15] propose demand-based coscheduling (DCS) which uses incoming messages to schedule the processes for which they are intended.…”
Section: Communication-driven Coscheduling (Cdc)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The simplest approach to time-sharing a cluster is to leave each node to schedule its own processes autonomously. However, this form of scheduling can be very inefficient for parallel jobs that need process synchronization, mainly due to the lack of coordination among local schedulers [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations