Analyzing the performance of greedy maximal scheduling via local pooling and graph theory

Efficient operation of wireless networks and switches requires using simple scheduling algorithms. In general, simple greedy algorithms (known as Greedy Maximal Scheduling - GMS) are guaranteed to achieve only a fraction of the maximum possible throughput. It was recently shown that in networks in which the Local Pooling conditions are satisfied, GMS achieves 100% throughput. Moreover, in networks in which the σ-Local Pooling conditions hold, GMS achieves σ% throughput. In this extended abstract, we characterize all the network graphs in which Local Pooling holds under primary interference constraints. We then show that in all bipartite graphs (i.e., input-queued switches) of size up to 7×n, GMS is guaranteed to achieve 66% throughput, thereby improving upon the previously known 50% lower bound. Finally, we study the performance of GMS in interference graphs and show that in certain specific topologies its performance could be very bad. Overall, we demonstrate that using graph theoretical techniques can significantly contribute to our understanding of greedy scheduling algorithms. The proofs of the results have been omitted for brevity and can be found in [1].

[1]  Frédéric Maffray,et al.  Kernels in perfect line-graphs , 1992, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[2]  N. J. A. Sloane,et al.  The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences , 2003, Electron. J. Comb..

[3]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Understanding the Capacity Region of the Greedy Maximal Scheduling Algorithm in Multihop Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[4]  Leandros Tassiulas,et al.  Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks , 1992 .

[5]  Eytan Modiano,et al.  Multihop Local Pooling for Distributed Throughput Maximization in Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE INFOCOM 2008 - The 27th Conference on Computer Communications.

[6]  Hans L. Bodlaender,et al.  On Linear Time Minor Tests with Depth-First Search , 1993, J. Algorithms.

[7]  D. West Introduction to Graph Theory , 1995 .

[8]  Jaap-Henk Hoepman,et al.  Simple Distributed Weighted Matchings , 2004, ArXiv.

[9]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  On the Complexity of Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2010, EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw..

[10]  Balaji Prabhakar,et al.  The throughput of data switches with and without speedup , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[11]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  The impact of imperfect scheduling on cross-layer rate control in wireless networks , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[12]  Leandros Tassiulas,et al.  Resource Allocation and Cross-Layer Control in Wireless Networks , 2006, Found. Trends Netw..

[13]  Lili Qiu,et al.  Impact of Interference on Multi-Hop Wireless Network Performance , 2003, MobiCom '03.

[14]  Nick McKeown,et al.  A Starvation-free Algorithm For Achieving 100% Throughput in an Input- Queued Switch , 1999 .

[15]  Jian Ni,et al.  Improved Bounds on the Throughput Efficiency of Greedy Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2011, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[16]  Roger Wattenhofer,et al.  The Complexity of Connectivity in Wireless Networks , 2006, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2006. 25TH IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[17]  Maria Chudnovsky,et al.  Claw-free graphs with strongly perfect complements. Fractional and integral version. Part I. Basic graphs , 2011, Discret. Appl. Math..

[18]  J. Walrand,et al.  Sufficient conditions for stability of longest-queue-first scheduling: second-order properties using fluid limits , 2006, Advances in Applied Probability.

[19]  Eytan Modiano,et al.  Enabling distributed throughput maximization in wireless mesh networks: a partitioning approach , 2006, MobiCom '06.

[20]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Performance limits of greedy maximal matching in multi-hop wireless networks , 2007, 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[21]  Roger Wattenhofer,et al.  What cannot be computed locally! , 2004, PODC '04.

[22]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Understanding the capacity region of the Greedy maximal scheduling algorithm in multihop wireless networks , 2009, TNET.

[23]  Ye Xia,et al.  A Refined Performance Characterization of Longest-Queue-First Policy in Wireless Networks , 2009, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[24]  Robert Preis,et al.  Linear Time 1/2-Approximation Algorithm for Maximum Weighted Matching in General Graphs , 1999, STACS.

[25]  Marco Ajmone Marsan,et al.  On the stability of isolated and interconnected input-queueing switches under multiclass traffic , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[26]  Koushik Kar,et al.  Throughput and Fairness Guarantees Through Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[27]  J. Gross,et al.  Graph Theory and Its Applications , 1998 .

[28]  Paolo Giaccone,et al.  Randomized scheduling algorithms for high-aggregate bandwidth switches , 2003, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[29]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  On the Complexity of Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2006, MobiCom '06.

[30]  Xiaojun Lin,et al.  The impact of imperfect scheduling on cross-Layer congestion control in wireless networks , 2006, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[31]  Stefan Hougardy,et al.  Classes of perfect graphs , 2006, Discret. Math..