Jump to content

Processor sharing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gareth Jones (talk | contribs) at 11:47, 22 November 2013 (Generalized processor sharing: include reference to paper mentioning GPS as a useful benchmark of fairness in processor scheduling). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Processor sharing is a service policy where the customers, clients or jobs are all served simultaneously, each receiving an equal fraction of the service capacity available. In such a system all jobs start service immediately (there is no queueing).

The processor sharing algorithm "emerged as an idealisation of round-robin scheduling algorithms in time-shared computer systems."[1][2]

Queueing theory

A single server queue operating subject to Poisson arrivals (such as an M/M/1 queue or M/G/1 queue) with a processor sharing discipline has a geometric stationary distribution.[1]

The sojourn time jobs experience has no closed form solution, even in an M/M/1 queue.[3]

Discriminatory processor sharing

Discriminatory processor sharing is a multi-class adaptation of the policy where jobs are assigned classes and each class assigned a positive weighting factor. Service capacity is split between all the jobs present according to their service weights.[4] If all the class weights are equal then DPS is the same as PS.[1]

Generalized processor sharing

Generalized processor sharing is a mult-class adaptation of the policy which shares service capacity according to positive weight factors to all non-empty job classes at the node, irrespective of the number of jobs of each class present. Often it is assumed that the jobs within a class form a queue and that queue is served on a first-come, first-served basis, but this assumption is not necessary for many GPS applications.[1]

In processor scheduling, generalized processor sharing is "an idealized scheduling algorithm that achieves perfect fairness. All practical schedulers approximate GPS and use it as a reference to measure fairness."[5]

References

  1. ^ a b c d Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1145/1243401.1243409, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1145/1243401.1243409 instead.
  2. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1145/321386.321388, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1145/321386.321388 instead.
  3. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s11134-006-7585-9, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s11134-006-7585-9 instead.
  4. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1007/s11134-006-7586-8, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1007/s11134-006-7586-8 instead.
  5. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1145/1594835.1504188, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1145/1594835.1504188 instead.