调度分时服务器以最小化聚合延迟

A. J. Goldman
{"title":"调度分时服务器以最小化聚合延迟","authors":"A. J. Goldman","doi":"10.6028/JRES.076B.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A 1967 paper by Rangarajan and Oliver [1)1 contains a formulation and analysis of the two problems described below, which pertain to the allocation of servicing times among N incoming streams requiring \"processing\" of some kind by a single \"server.\" The server might for example be a switching point or a congestion point (e.g., a tunnel entrance) in a transport network, in which case \"processing\" an item (vehicle) simply means letting it through. Or, the server might be a computer handling reservations from several ticket offices, or exercising real-time control over vehicle movements on several network links, or performing some other tasks on a time·shared basis. The streams are treated as continuous flows. During each service cycle, of duration T, the server handles stream 1 for time Ct , switches (with associated known switch-over or \"dead\" time) to handle stream 2 for time C2 , etc. The arrivals in each stream are assumed nonrandom, with a known uniform rate (possibly different for different streams). The server's processing rate, when serving a particular stream, is also assumed nonrandom and constant (possibly different for different streams). Each Ci is constrained to be at least large enough so that no queue remains in the i th stream when one of that stream's service periods ends. The two problems formulated and analyzed are these: PROBLEM 1: For given cycle time T, what allocation Ct , C2·, ••• , CN of service times among the various streams is optimal, in the sense of minimizing total waiting time per cycle? PROBLEM 2: What value of the cycle time T will minimize average waiting time? Subsequently Horn [2] showed that the more general case, in which all streams are served equally often (possibly more than once) per cycle, can be reduced to PROBLEM 1. This provides additional reason for offering an alternative analysis, which is more self-contained and (at least to the writer) simpler than that of reference [1]. In addition, a mild generalization will be introduced by permitting the penalties for delay to be different for different streams.","PeriodicalId":166823,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, Section B: Mathematical Sciences","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1972-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scheduling a time-shared server to minimize aggregate delay\",\"authors\":\"A. J. Goldman\",\"doi\":\"10.6028/JRES.076B.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A 1967 paper by Rangarajan and Oliver [1)1 contains a formulation and analysis of the two problems described below, which pertain to the allocation of servicing times among N incoming streams requiring \\\"processing\\\" of some kind by a single \\\"server.\\\" The server might for example be a switching point or a congestion point (e.g., a tunnel entrance) in a transport network, in which case \\\"processing\\\" an item (vehicle) simply means letting it through. Or, the server might be a computer handling reservations from several ticket offices, or exercising real-time control over vehicle movements on several network links, or performing some other tasks on a time·shared basis. The streams are treated as continuous flows. During each service cycle, of duration T, the server handles stream 1 for time Ct , switches (with associated known switch-over or \\\"dead\\\" time) to handle stream 2 for time C2 , etc. The arrivals in each stream are assumed nonrandom, with a known uniform rate (possibly different for different streams). The server's processing rate, when serving a particular stream, is also assumed nonrandom and constant (possibly different for different streams). Each Ci is constrained to be at least large enough so that no queue remains in the i th stream when one of that stream's service periods ends. The two problems formulated and analyzed are these: PROBLEM 1: For given cycle time T, what allocation Ct , C2·, ••• , CN of service times among the various streams is optimal, in the sense of minimizing total waiting time per cycle? PROBLEM 2: What value of the cycle time T will minimize average waiting time? Subsequently Horn [2] showed that the more general case, in which all streams are served equally often (possibly more than once) per cycle, can be reduced to PROBLEM 1. This provides additional reason for offering an alternative analysis, which is more self-contained and (at least to the writer) simpler than that of reference [1]. In addition, a mild generalization will be introduced by permitting the penalties for delay to be different for different streams.\",\"PeriodicalId\":166823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, Section B: Mathematical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1972-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, Section B: Mathematical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6028/JRES.076B.008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, Section B: Mathematical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6028/JRES.076B.008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Rangarajan和Oliver在1967年发表的一篇论文[1)1包含了下面描述的两个问题的公式和分析,这两个问题涉及到需要由单个“服务器”进行某种“处理”的N个传入流之间的服务时间分配。例如,服务器可能是传输网络中的交换点或拥塞点(例如,隧道入口),在这种情况下,“处理”一个项目(车辆)仅仅意味着让它通过。或者,服务器可能是一台计算机,处理来自多个售票处的预订,或者在几个网络链接上对车辆运动进行实时控制,或者在时间共享的基础上执行其他一些任务。溪流被视为连续的流动。在持续时间T的每个服务周期中,服务器处理流1的时间为Ct,切换(具有相关的已知切换或“死”时间)处理流2的时间为C2,等等。假设每个流中的到达是非随机的,具有已知的统一速率(不同的流可能不同)。当服务于特定流时,服务器的处理速率也被假定为非随机和恒定的(不同的流可能不同)。每个Ci被约束为至少足够大,以便当流的一个服务周期结束时,流中没有队列保留。提出并分析的两个问题是:问题1:对于给定的周期时间T,在每个周期总等待时间最小的意义上,服务时间在各个流中的分配Ct、C2·、•••、CN是最优的?问题2:什么值的周期时间T将最小化平均等待时间?随后,Horn[2]表明,在更一般的情况下,每个周期中所有流的服务频率相同(可能不止一次),可以简化为问题1。这为提供另一种分析提供了额外的理由,这种分析比参考文献[1]的分析更独立,而且(至少对作者来说)更简单。此外,通过允许对不同流的延迟惩罚不同,将引入一个温和的泛化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Scheduling a time-shared server to minimize aggregate delay
A 1967 paper by Rangarajan and Oliver [1)1 contains a formulation and analysis of the two problems described below, which pertain to the allocation of servicing times among N incoming streams requiring "processing" of some kind by a single "server." The server might for example be a switching point or a congestion point (e.g., a tunnel entrance) in a transport network, in which case "processing" an item (vehicle) simply means letting it through. Or, the server might be a computer handling reservations from several ticket offices, or exercising real-time control over vehicle movements on several network links, or performing some other tasks on a time·shared basis. The streams are treated as continuous flows. During each service cycle, of duration T, the server handles stream 1 for time Ct , switches (with associated known switch-over or "dead" time) to handle stream 2 for time C2 , etc. The arrivals in each stream are assumed nonrandom, with a known uniform rate (possibly different for different streams). The server's processing rate, when serving a particular stream, is also assumed nonrandom and constant (possibly different for different streams). Each Ci is constrained to be at least large enough so that no queue remains in the i th stream when one of that stream's service periods ends. The two problems formulated and analyzed are these: PROBLEM 1: For given cycle time T, what allocation Ct , C2·, ••• , CN of service times among the various streams is optimal, in the sense of minimizing total waiting time per cycle? PROBLEM 2: What value of the cycle time T will minimize average waiting time? Subsequently Horn [2] showed that the more general case, in which all streams are served equally often (possibly more than once) per cycle, can be reduced to PROBLEM 1. This provides additional reason for offering an alternative analysis, which is more self-contained and (at least to the writer) simpler than that of reference [1]. In addition, a mild generalization will be introduced by permitting the penalties for delay to be different for different streams.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信