Paper detail

Parallel Load Balancing on Constrained Client-Server Topologies

We study parallel \emph{Load Balancing} protocols for a client-server distributed model defined as follows. There is a set $\sC$ of $n$ clients and a set $\sS$ of $n$ servers where each client has (at most) a constant number $d \geq 1$ of requests that must be assigned to some server. The client set and the server one are connected to each other via a fixed bipartite graph: the requests of client $v$ can only be sent to the servers in its neighborhood $N(v)$. The goal is to assign every client request so as to minimize the maximum load of the servers. In this setting, efficient parallel protocols are available only for dense topolgies. In particular, a simple symmetric, non-adaptive protocol achieving constant maximum load has been recently introduced by Becchetti et al \cite{BCNPT18} for regular dense bipartite graphs. The parallel completion time is $\bigO(\log n)$ and the overall work is $\bigO(n)$, w.h.p. Motivated by proximity constraints arising in some client-server systems, we devise a simple variant of Becchetti et al's protocol \cite{BCNPT18} and we analyse it over almost-regular bipartite graphs where nodes may have neighborhoods of small size. In detail, we prove that, w.h.p., this new version has a cost equivalent to that of Becchetti et al's protocol (in terms of maximum load, completion time, and work complexity, respectively) on every almost-regular bipartite graph with degree $Ω(\log^2n)$. Our analysis significantly departs from that in \cite{BCNPT18} for the original protocol and requires to cope with non-trivial stochastic-dependence issues on the random choices of the algorithmic process which are due to the worst-case, sparse topology of the underlying graph.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.