1999
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-47954-6_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using Run-Time Predictions to Estimate Queue Wait Times and Improve Scheduler Performance

Abstract: On many computers, a request to run a job is not serviced immediately but instead is placed in a queue and serviced only when resources are r eleased b y p r eceding jobs. In this paper, we build on run-time prediction techniques that we developed i n p r evious research to explore two problems. The rst problem is to predict how long applications will wait in a queue until they receive resources. We show that run-time estimates can be used for this and that using our run-time estimates result in more a c curat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
119
0
7

Year Published

2006
2006
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 157 publications
(127 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
119
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…We can see in the tables that the two leading causes of variability (i.e., the highest standard deviations relative to the means) are: (i) initialization and finalization operations on the "login" node (initialization, staging data, building executable, and cleanup); and (ii) queue wait times. This was expected as the number of users actively working on a login node varies greatly over time and queue wait times are known to exhibit variable and non-stationary behaviors [9]. As seen in Table IV we show three separate totals: (i) total probe runtime; (ii) probe runtime excluding setup/cleanup; and (iii) probe runtime excluding setup/cleanup and queue wait times.…”
Section: Performance and Availabilitymentioning
confidence: 84%
“…We can see in the tables that the two leading causes of variability (i.e., the highest standard deviations relative to the means) are: (i) initialization and finalization operations on the "login" node (initialization, staging data, building executable, and cleanup); and (ii) queue wait times. This was expected as the number of users actively working on a login node varies greatly over time and queue wait times are known to exhibit variable and non-stationary behaviors [9]. As seen in Table IV we show three separate totals: (i) total probe runtime; (ii) probe runtime excluding setup/cleanup; and (iii) probe runtime excluding setup/cleanup and queue wait times.…”
Section: Performance and Availabilitymentioning
confidence: 84%
“…After experimentation, the authors conclude that the Top-K Mean method performed better than any of the three regression approaches (linear, logarithmic and inverse). Similarly, in [75], Smith et al use Top-K Linear Regression to predict run times for applications on computational grid systems. Yet again, their results suggest that Top-K Mean performs better than th e Top-K Linear Regression approach.…”
Section: Top-k Regressionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The performance differences between Grid resources and the fact that their relative performance characteristics may vary for different types of applications makes resource selection difficult, see, e.g., [9,16,19,20]. Our approach to handle this is to use a benchmark-based procedure for resource selection.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%