ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Selfish traffic allocation for server farms
Full text PdfPdf (186 KB)
Source Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing archive
Proceedings of the thiry-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing table of contents
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
SESSION: Session 5B table of contents
Pages: 287 - 296  
Year of Publication: 2002
ISBN:1-58113-495-9
Authors
Artur Czumaj  New Jersey Institute of Technology
Piotr Krysta  Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrücken, Germany
Berthold Vöcking  Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrücken, Germany
Sponsor
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 6,   Downloads (12 Months): 55,   Citation Count: 25
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   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/10.1145/509907.509952
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We investigate the price of selfish routing in non-cooperative networks in terms of the coordination and bicriteria ratios in the recently introduced game theoretic network model of Koutsoupias and Papadimitriou. We present the first thorough study of this model for general, monotone families of cost functions and for cost functionsm from Queueing Theory. Our main results can be summarized as follows.

  • We give a precise characterization of cost functions having a bounded/unbounded coordination ratio. For example, cost functions that describe the expected delay in queueing systems have an unbounded coordination ratio.
  • We show that an unbounded coordination ratio implies additionally an extremely high performance degradation under bicriteria measures. We demonstrate that the price of selfish routing can be as high as a bandwidth degradation by a factor that is linear in the network size.
  • We separate the game theoretic (integral) allocation model from the (fractional) flow model by demonstrating that even a very small, in fact negligible, amount of integrality can lead to a dramatic performance degradation.
  • We unify recent results on selfish routing under different objectives by showing that an unbounded coordination ratio under the min-max objective implies an unbounded coordination ratio under the average-cost (or total-latency) objective and vice versa.
.Our special focus lies on cost functions describing the behavior of Web servers that can open only a limited number of TCP connections. In particular, we compare the performance of queueing systems that serve all incoming requests with servers that reject requests in case of overload.From the result presented in this paper we conclude that queuing systems without rejection cannot give any reasonable guarantee on the expected delay of requests under selfish routing even when the injected load is far away from the capacity of the system. In contrast, Web server farms that are allowed to reject requests can guarantee a high quality of service for every individual request stream even under relatively high injection rates.


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
M. Beckmann, C. B. McGuire, and C. B. Winston. Studies in the Economimices of Transportation. Yale University Press, 1956.
 
2
 
3
 
4
F. Douglis, A. Feldmann, B. Krishnamurthy, and J. Mogul. Rate of change and other metrics: a live study of the World Wide Web. In Proc USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems, pp. 147--158, December 1997.
5
 
6
M. Frank. The Braess paradox. (MATH)ematical Programming Study, 20:283--302, 1981.
 
7
P. Franken, D. Konig, U. Arndt, and V. Schmidt. Queues and Point Processes. Wiley, Chichester, 1982.
 
8
E. Friedman. A generic analysis of selfish routing. Manuscript, 2001.
 
9
D. Gross and C. M. Harris. Queueing Theory. Third Edition John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1998.
 
10
 
11
Y. A. Korilis, A. A. Lazar, and A. Orda. Capacity allocation under noncooperative routing. In IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 42(3):309--325, 1997.
 
12
Y. A. Korilis, A. A. Lazar, and A. Orda. Avoiding the Braess paradox in noncooperative networks. In Journal of Applied Probability, 36(1):211--212, 1999.
 
13
E. Koutsoupias, M. Mavronicolas, and P. Spirakis. Personal communication, 2001.
 
14
E. Koutsoupias and C. H. Papadimitriou. Worst-case equilibria. In Proc. 16th STACS, pp. 404--413, 1999.
 
15
16
 
17
 
18
19
 
20
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
R. Steinberg and W. I. Zangwill. The prevalence of Braess' paradox. Transportation Science, 17(3):301--318, 1983.
 
29
J. G. Wardrop. Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research. In Proc Institution of Civil Engineers, Part II, volume 1, pp. 325--362, 1952.

CITED BY  25

Collaborative Colleagues:
Artur Czumaj: colleagues
Piotr Krysta: colleagues
Berthold Vöcking: colleagues