4.2 Article

Scheduling malleable tasks with precedence constraints

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER AND SYSTEM SCIENCES
Volume 78, Issue 1, Pages 245-259

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcss.2011.04.003

Keywords

Approximation algorithm; Scheduling; Malleable tasks

Funding

  1. DFG - Graduiertenkolleg, Effiziente Algorithmen und Mehrskalenmethoden
  2. EU Thematic Network APPOL I + II, Approximation and Online Algorithms [IST-1999-14084, IST-2001-32007]
  3. EU Research Training Network ARACNE, Approximation and Randomized Algorithms in Communication Networks [HPRN-CT-1999-00112]
  4. EU [IST-2001-33135]
  5. MITACS grant of Canada
  6. NSERC [DG 5-48923]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper we propose an approximation algorithm for scheduling malleable tasks with precedence constraints. Based on an interesting model for malleable tasks with continuous processor allotments by Prasanna and Musicus (1991. 1994, 1996) vertical bar 23-25 vertical bar, we define two natural assumptions for malleable tasks: the processing time of any malleable task is non-increasing in the number of processors allotted, and the speedup is concave in the number of processors. We show that under these assumptions the work function of any malleable task is non-decreasing in the number of processors and is convex in the processing time. Furthermore, we propose a two-phase approximation algorithm for the scheduling problem. In the first phase we solve a linear program to obtain a fractional allotment for all tasks. By rounding the fractional solution, each malleable task is assigned a number of processors. In the second phase a variant of the list scheduling algorithm is employed. By choosing appropriate values of the parameters, we show (via a nonlinear program) that the approximation ratio of our algorithm is at most 100/63 + 100(root 6469 + 13)/5481 approximate to 3.291919. We also show that our result is asymptotically tight. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available