Paper detail

Perfectly Balanced Allocation With Estimated Average Using Expected Constant Retries

Balanced allocation of online balls-into-bins has long been an active area of research for efficient load balancing and hashing applications.There exists a large number of results in this domain for different settings, such as parallel allocations~\cite{parallel}, multi-dimensional allocations~\cite{multi}, weighted balls~\cite{weight} etc. For sequential multi-choice allocation, where $m$ balls are thrown into $n$ bins with each ball choosing $d$ (constant) bins independently uniformly at random, the maximum load of a bin is $O(\log \log n) + m/n$ with high probability~\cite{heavily_load}. This offers the current best known allocation scheme. However, for $d = Θ(\log n)$, the gap reduces to $O(1)$~\cite{soda08}.A similar constant gap bound has been established for parallel allocations with $O(\log ^*n)$ communication rounds~\cite{lenzen}. In this paper we propose a novel multi-choice allocation algorithm, \emph{Improved D-choice with Estimated Average} ($IDEA$) achieving a constant gap with a high probability for the sequential single-dimensional online allocation problem with constant $d$. We achieve a maximum load of $\lceil m/n \rceil$ with high probability for constant $d$ choice scheme with \emph{expected} constant number of retries or rounds per ball. We also show that the bound holds even for an arbitrary large number of balls, $m>>n$. Further, we generalize this result to (i)~the weighted case, where balls have weights drawn from an arbitrary weight distribution with finite variance, (ii)~multi-dimensional setting, where balls have $D$ dimensions with $f$ randomly and uniformly chosen filled dimension for $m=n$, and (iii)~the parallel case, where $n$ balls arrive and are placed parallely in the bins. We show that the gap in these case is also a constant w.h.p. (independent of $m$) for constant value of $d$ with expected constant number of retries per ball.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.