Upload
clodia
View
27
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Better Scalable Algorithms for Broadcast Scheduling. Ravishankar Krishnaswamy Carnegie Mellon University Joint work with Nikhil Bansal and Viswanath Nagarajan (IBM T. J. Watson Research Lab). Outline. Motivation, Problem Definition Existing Results, Our Results - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1
Better Scalable Algorithms for Broadcast Scheduling
Ravishankar KrishnaswamyCarnegie Mellon University
Joint work with Nikhil Bansal and Viswanath Nagarajan (IBM T. J. Watson Research Lab)
Outline
• Motivation, Problem Definition
• Existing Results, Our Results
• A Weaker Approximation/ Analysis
• Conclusion
2
Motivation: Client-Server System
Clients Server
Page A at time 1
Page B at time 1
Page A at time 2Page C at time 3
Page A at time 3
Page APage BPage CPage Abroadcast
Motivation: Formalizing
• Consider a server which has n unit-sized pages– Requests for these pages arrive online, over time– At each time slot, we can broadcast one page• All pending requests for that page are satisfied
• How do we schedule to minimize average response time of requests
4
Online Broadcast Scheduling
• Input– A collection of n pages– A request sequence arrives online
• Request r: arrival time a(r), requested page p(r)
• Output– A broadcast of pages, one at a time
• Objective Function– Minimize Average Response Time– Minimize Maximum Response Time– …
This Talk
A Concrete Example
Instance has 3 pages
ABC
A B C
A B
B
A BC
Total Response Time: 1 + 2 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 12
A
Total Response Time: 2 + 3 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 8
Existing Results (Average Response Time)
• In the offline setting• O(log2n)-approximation algorithm [BCS06]
• In the online setting• very strong lower bounds if no speed-up• (2+є) speed-up, O(1/є2)-competitive[EP09] • (1+є) speed-up, O(1/є11)-competitive [IM10]
(works only for unit-size pages)
Our Results
8
A very simple (1+є) speed, O(1/є3)-competitive online algorithm. Can be extended to the setting when the pages have non-uniform sizes
High Level Idea
9
Consider “Fractional” Relaxation of Broadcast Scheduling
Get (1+є) speed, O(1/є2) competitive online algorithm
Design an online rounding algorithm, with further O(1/є) loss in obj. function
Fractional Relaxation
• At each time slot, we can broadcast multiple pages, each to extent xpt
– Such that
• A request r is satisfied at the first time b(r) when
• Minimize
10
High Level Idea
11
Consider “Fractional” Relaxation of Broadcast Scheduling
Get (1+є) speed, O(1/є2) competitive online algorithm
Design an online rounding algorithm, with further O(1/є) loss in obj. function
Algorithm (with weaker guarantee)
• Round Robin– Known to give online algorithms with good
competitive ratio for other scheduling problems assuming factor of 2 speed-up
– What about broadcast scheduling?– Naïve algorithm is bad• Does not differentiate pages with many outstanding
requests and those with 1 request
12
Algorithm (with weaker guarantee)
• Round Robin: Possible Fix– Round robin over requests!
At any time, schedule each outstanding request to the same extent.
• Illustration
13
ABC
A B
A: 1/3B: 1/3C: 1/3
A: 2/4B: 1/4C: 1/4
A: 2/5B: 2/5C: 1/5
A: 1/4B: 2/4C: 1/4
A: 1/3B: 1/3C: 1/3
…
Algorithm (with weaker guarantee)
• Round Robin: Possible Fix– Round robin over requests!
At any time, schedule each outstanding request to the same extent.
• Can we show anything for this algorithm?– Edmonds and Pruhs showed it is 4-speed O(1) competitive
• We show that fractionally, it is 2-speed O(1) competitive– Later round it to get integer schedule.
14
Analysis
15
• Resort to an amortized analysis• Define a potential function Φ(t) which is 0 at t=0 and t=• Show the following:
– At any request arrival,
ΔΦ ≤ 0 – At all other times,
15
Will give us a β-competitive online algorithm
For our Problem
• Define
• rank(r) is sorted order of requests w.r.t arrival times (most recent has highest rank)
• z(r,t) is the amount of time the online algorithm will dedicate towards request r, in the future, i.e. after time t
16
Analysis Continued
• New request arrival– It belongs to NA(t) and NO(t)– Does not appear in potential function– No change in value
17
Analysis Continued
• Running Condition: Consider [t-1, t)• Opt schedules a page and finishes some requests• These terms will now appear in the potential function.• How much increase will it cause?
– The sum of the z(r,t) over all these requests is at most 1– Total increase is at most NA(t)
18
We’re golden if NO(t) is even a tiny fraction of NA(t)
Analysis Continued
• Assume most unfinished requests are completed by OPT• Hope that Φ(t) goes down enough.
19
(i) We make progress on all jobs(ii)Each job’s z value goes down by 1/NA(t)(iii)Total decrease is NA(t)/2 * 1/NA(t) * 2
(iv)Left hand side is non-positive!Speed-Up
High Level Idea
20
Consider “Fractional” Relaxation of Broadcast Scheduling
Get (1+є) speed, O(1/є2) competitive online algorithm
Design an online rounding algorithm, with further O(1/є) loss in obj. function
Rounding: One Slide Overview
• Consider the fractional algorithm’s output• Let request r be fractionally completed at time b(r)• Enqueue element <r, b(r) – a(r)>• At any time, choose request with least width and
display corresponding page. Wipe out all outstanding requests for page p(r)
21
Suppose a request was forced to wait for too much time.Then many other requests for different pages all having smaller width.
Too much mass packed fractionally. A contradiction.
Thank You
Summary + Open Question
• Near-optimal algorithm for broadcast scheduling– Consider “fractional relaxation”– Give good algorithm for fractional problem– Give rounding scheme for integral problem
• But algorithm depends on є– Not fully-scalable – Can we get one such algorithm which works for all є?
22