Task Scheduling for Multiprocessor Systems with Autonomous Performance-Optimizing Control

In all non-blocking non-preemptive (NBNP) scheduling techniques for a multicomputer system for processor allocation, Largest-Job-First (LJF) technique proves to possess a unique characteristic in utilizing as many processors as possible compared to others such as First-Come-First-Serve (FCFS) and Smallest-Job-First (SJF). However, a job-bypass limit that is preset to preclude the starvation problem in an NBNP platform may lead to problems in all techniques. The scheduling becomes ”mandatory blocking” whenever a job reaches this bypass limit and thus has to be scheduled for allocation in the next immediate turn. This deprives the scheduling process the flexibility benefit in its non-blocking nature. Such an adverse effect is especially pronounced in LJF compared to the normally used FCFS one. Thus, how to find a balance in real time between employing the LJF and the FCFS in different situations is the main focus of this paper. We first propose an automatic control process which allows automatic adjustment on the algorithm based on the observed performance. This process, unlike the well-known feedback-control process, adjusts the algorithm based on an unbiased approach in order to disengage the dependence of performance on the input. We then propose two different scheduling techniques that simply employ this control process to self-adjust the weights in between using the two different techniques in real time. Performance results observed from our simulation runs show a significant improvement over the plain LJF and FCFS.

[1]  Matt W. Mutka,et al.  Efficient job scheduling in a mesh multicomputer without discrimination against large jobs , 1995, Proceedings.Seventh IEEE Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing.

[2]  P. Sadayappan,et al.  Selective Reservation Strategies for Backfill Job Scheduling , 2002, JSSPP.

[3]  James Patton Jones,et al.  Scheduling for Parallel Supercomputing: A Historical Perspective of Achievable Utilization , 1999, JSSPP.

[4]  Dror G. Feitelson,et al.  Backfilling with Lookahead to Optimize the Performance of Parallel Job Scheduling , 2003, JSSPP.

[5]  Anand Sivasubramaniam,et al.  Improving parallel job scheduling by combining gang scheduling and backfilling techniques , 2000, Proceedings 14th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium. IPDPS 2000.

[6]  Su-Hui Chiang,et al.  Benefit of limited time sharing in the presence of very large parallel jobs , 2005, 19th IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium.

[7]  Dror G. Feitelson,et al.  Utilization, Predictability, Workloads, and User Runtime Estimates in Scheduling the IBM SP2 with Backfilling , 2001, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst..

[8]  Yueh-Min Huang,et al.  Scheduling multiprocessor job with resource and timing constraints using neural networks , 1999, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[9]  Jens Mache,et al.  Job scheduling for prime time vs. non-prime time , 2002, Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing.

[10]  Prasant Mohapatra,et al.  An integrated processor management scheme for the mesh-connected multicomputer systems , 1997, Proceedings of the 1997 International Conference on Parallel Processing (Cat. No.97TB100162).

[11]  Thomas R. Gross,et al.  Impact of Job Mix on Optimizations for Space Sharing Schedulers , 1996, Proceedings of the 1996 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing.

[12]  Xiuli Wang,et al.  Solving multiprocessor job scheduling with resource and timing constraints using neural network , 2002, 2002 IEEE Region 10 Conference on Computers, Communications, Control and Power Engineering. TENCOM '02. Proceedings..

[13]  Dror G. Feitelson,et al.  Utilization and Predictability in Scheduling the IBM SP2 with Backfilling , 1998, Proceedings of the First Merged International Parallel Processing Symposium and Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing.

[14]  Helen D. Karatza Simulation study of multitasking in distributed server systems with variable workload , 2004, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.