This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Comparison of Hybrid Minimum Laxity/First-In-First-Out Scheduling Policies for Real-Time Multiprocessors
October 1992 (vol. 41 no. 10)
pp. 1271-1278

The behavior of two policies for scheduling customers with deadlines until the beginning of service onto multiprocessors is studied. Both policies attempt to approximate the performance of the minimum laxity (ML) scheduling policy without incurring its complete overhead by dividing the queue in two: one, of maximum size n<0, managed using the minimum laxity policy, and another, of unbounded size, managed in a first-in-first-out manner. One policy, F/ML(n), places the ML queue at the front, i.e. customers finding n or more in the system enter the first-in-first-out (FIFO) queue which in turn feeds the ML queue. The other policy, ML(n)/F, places the ML queue at the back, i.e. arriving customers enter the ML queue and if the total number in the system exceeds n, forces one customer from the ML queue to the FIFO queue. It is shown that these seemingly dissimilar policies exhibit exactly the same behavior for a fixed value of n both when customers are allowed to be discarded when they miss their deadlines before entering service and when they are not allowed to be discarded. Monotonicity properties are established for both policies.

[1] P. P. Bhattacharya and A. Ephremides, "Optimal scheduling with strict deadlines,"IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 721-728, 1989.
[2] A. A. Borovkov,Stochastic Processes in Queueing Theory, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1976.
[3] J. W. Cohen,On Regenerative Processes in Queueing Theory, Lect. Notes Econ. and Math. Syst., vol. 121, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1976.
[4] A. Gut,Stopped Random Walks, Limit Theorems and Applications, Appl. Prob. Series vol. 5, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.
[5] J. Hong, X. Tan, and D. Towsley, "A performance analysis of minimum laxity and earliest deadline scheduling in a real-time system,"IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 1736-1744, 1989.
[6] M. Loèe,Probability Theory I, 4th ed. New York: Springer Verlag, 1977.
[7] S. Panwar, "Time constrained and multiaccess communications," Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of Massachusetts at Amherst, Feb. 1986.
[8] S. Panwar, D. Towsley, and J. Wolf, "Optimal scheduling policies for a class of queues with customer deadlines to the beginning of service,"J. ACM, vol. 35, no. 4, Oct. 1988.
[9] K. Sigman, "Regeneration in tandem queues with multiserver stations,"J. Appl. Prob., vol. 25, pp. 391-403, 1988.
[10] D. Stoyan,Comparison Methods for Queues and Other Stochastic Processes, New-York: Wiley, 1983.
[11] D. Towsley and F. Baccelli, "Comparisons of service disciplines in a tandem queueing network with real-time constraints,Oper. Res. Lett., vol. 10, pp. 49-55, Feb. 1991.
[12] D. Towsley and S. S. Panwar, "On the optimality of minimum laxity and earliest deadline scheduling for real-time multiprocessors," inProc. Euromicro Real-Time Workshop, Denmark, June 1990, to be published.
[13] W. Zhao and J. A. Stankovic, "Performance evaluation of FCFS and improved FCFS scheduling for dynamic real-time computer systems," inProc. 10th Real-Time Syst. Symp., Santa Monica, CA, Dec. 5-7, 1989, pp. 156-165.

Index Terms:
first-in first-out queue; monotonicity properties; hybrid minimum laxity/first-in-first-out scheduling policies; real-time multiprocessors; performance; multiprocessing systems; performance evaluation; real-time systems; scheduling.
P. Nain, D. Towsley, "Comparison of Hybrid Minimum Laxity/First-In-First-Out Scheduling Policies for Real-Time Multiprocessors," IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 1271-1278, Oct. 1992, doi:10.1109/12.166604
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.