
We study the problem of scheduling in parallel systems with many users. We analyze scenarios with many submissions issued over time by several users. These submissions contain one or more jobs; the set of submissions are organized in successive campaigns. Jobs belonging to a single campaign are sequential and independent, but any job from a campaign cannot start until all the jobs from the previous campaign are completed. Each user's goal is to minimize the sum of flow times of his campaigns. We define a theoretical model for Campaign scheduling and show that, in the general case, it is NP-hard. For the single-user case, we show that an ρ-approximation scheduling algorithm for the (classic) parallel job scheduling problem is also an ρ-approximation for the Campaign scheduling problem. For the general case with k users, we establish a fairness criterion inspired by time sharing. We propose FAIRCAMP, a scheduling algorithm which uses campaign deadlines to achieve fairness among users between consecutive campaigns. We prove that FAIRCAMP increases the flow time of each user by a factor of at most kρ compared with a machine dedicated to the user. We also prove that FAIRCAMP is a ρ-approximation algorithm for the maximum stretch. By simulation, we compare FAIRCAMP to the First-Come-First-Served (FCFS). We show that, compared with FCFS, FAIRCAMP reduces the maximum stretch by up to 3.4 times. The difference is significant in systems used by many (k > 5) users. Our results show that, rather than just individual, independent jobs, campaigns of jobs can be handled by the scheduler efficiently and fairly.
[INFO.INFO-DC] Computer Science [cs]/Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing [cs.DC]
[INFO.INFO-DC] Computer Science [cs]/Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing [cs.DC]
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
