ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
SRPT optimally utilizes faster machines to minimize flow time
Full text PdfPdf (205 KB)
Source
ACM Transactions on Algorithms (TALG) archive
Volume 5 ,  Issue 1  (November 2008) table of contents
Article No. 1  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISSN:1549-6325
Authors
Eric Torng  Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Jason McCullough  University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 9,   Downloads (12 Months): 218,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1435375.1435376
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We analyze the shortest remaining processing time (SRPT) algorithm with respect to the problem of scheduling n jobs with release times on m identical machines to minimize total flow time. It is known that SRPT is optimal if m = 1 but that SRPT has a worst-case approximation ratio of Θ(min(log n/m, log Δ)) for this problem, where Δ is the ratio of the length of the longest job divided by the length of the shortest job. It has previously been shown that SRPT is able to use faster machines to produce a schedule as good as an optimal algorithm using slower machines. We now show that SRPT optimally uses these faster machines with respect to the worst-case approximation ratio. That is, if SRPT is given machines that are s ≥ 2 − 1/m times as fast as those used by an optimal algorithm, SRPT's flow time is at least s times smaller than the flow time incurred by the optimal algorithm. Clearly, no algorithm can offer a better worst-case guarantee, and we show that existing algorithms with similar performance guarantees to SRPT without resource augmentation do not optimally use extra resources.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
2
 
3
 
4
Bussema, C., and Torng, E. 2006. Greedy multiprocessor server scheduling. Oper. Res. Letters 34, 451--458.
5
6
 
7
Conway, R. W., Maxwell, W. L., and Miller, L. W. 1967. Theory of Scheduling. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
 
8
 
9
 
10
Graham, R. L., Lawler, E. L., Lenstra, J. K., and Rinnooy Kan, A. H. G. 1979. Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: A survey. Ann. Disc. Math. 5. 287--326.
11
 
12
Leonardi, S. 2003. A simpler proof of preemptive flow-time approximation. In Approximation and On-line Algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, New York.
13
 
14
Phillips, C., Stein, C., Torng, E., and Wein, J. 2002. Optimal time-critical scheduling via resource augmentation. Algorithmica 32, 163--200.
 
15
Schrage, L. E. 1968. A proof of the optimality of the shortest remaining processing time discipline. Oper. Res. 16, 678--690.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Eric Torng: colleagues
Jason McCullough: colleagues