Paper detail

Bidding policies for market-based HPC workflow scheduling

This paper considers the scheduling of jobs on distributed, heterogeneous High Performance Computing (HPC) clusters. Market-based approaches are known to be efficient for allocating limited resources to those that are most prepared to pay. This context is applicable to an HPC or cloud computing scenario where the platform is overloaded. In this paper, jobs are composed of dependent tasks. Each job has a non-increasing time-value curve associated with it. Jobs are submitted to and scheduled by a market-clearing centralised auctioneer. This paper compares the performance of several policies for generating task bids. The aim investigated here is to maximise the value for the platform provider while minimising the number of jobs that do not complete (or starve). It is found that the Projected Value Remaining bidding policy gives the highest level of value under a typical overload situation, and gives the lowest number of starved tasks across the space of utilisation examined. It does this by attempting to capture the urgency of tasks in the queue. At high levels of overload, some alternative algorithms produce slightly higher value, but at the cost of a hugely higher number of starved workflows.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.