Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Power of d Choices for Large-Scale Bin Packing: A Loss Model

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 June 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We consider a system of $N$ parallel servers, where each server consists of B units of a resource. Jobs arrive at this system according to a Poisson process, and each job stays in the system for an exponentially distributed amount of time. Each job may request different units of the resource from the system. The goal is to understand how to route arriving jobs to the servers to minimize the probability that an arriving job does not find the required amount of resource at the server, i.e., the goal is to minimize blocking probability. The motivation for this problem arises from the design of cloud computing systems in which the jobs are virtual machines (VMs) that request resources such as memory from a large pool of servers. In this paper, we consider power-of-d-choices routing, where a job is routed to the server with the largest amount of available resource among d ≥ 2 randomly chosen servers. We consider a fluid model that corresponds to the limit as N goes to infinity and provide an explicit upper bound for the equilibrium blocking probability. We show that the upper bound exhibits different behavior as B goes to infinity depending on the relationship between the total traffic intensity λ and B. In particular, if (B -- λ)/√λ → α, the upper bound is doubly exponential in √λ and if (B -- λ)/logd λ → β, β > 1, the upper bound is exponential in λ. Simulation results show that the blocking probability, even for small B, exhibits qualitatively different behavior in the two traffic regimes. This is in contrast with the result for random routing, where the blocking probability scales as O(1/√λ) even if (B -- λ)/√λ → α.

References

  1. Amazon EC2. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. V. Anantharam and M. Benchekroun. A technique for computing sojourn times in large networks of interacting queues. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences, 7(04):441--464, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Google App Engine. https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs?csw=1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Y. Azar, A. Z. Broder, A. R. Karlin, and E. Upfal. Balanced allocations. SIAM J. Comput., 29(1):180--200, Sept. 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Azure. http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. N. Bansal, A. Caprara, and M. Sviridenko. A new approximation method for set covering problems, with applications to multidimensional bin packing. SIAM Journal on Computing, 39(4):1256--1278, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. A. Borovkov. Stochastic Processes in Queueing Theory. Springer, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. M. Bramson, Y. Lu, and B. Prabhakar. Asymptotic independence of queues under randomized load balancing. Queueing Systems, 71(3):247--292, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Csirik, D. S. Johnson, C. Kenyon, J. B. Orlin, P. W. Shor, and R. R. Weber. On the sum-of-squares algorithm for bin packing. J. ACM, 53(1):1--65, Jan. 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Graham. Chaoticity on path space for a queueing network with selection of the shortest queue among several. Journal of Applied Probability, 37(1):198--211, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. V. Gupta and A. Radovanovic. Online stochastic bin packing, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. Kaufman. Blocking in a shared resource environment. Communications, IEEE Transactions on, 29(10):1474--1481, Oct 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. T. G. Kurtz. Approximation of Population Processes. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M. Luczak and C. McDiarmid. On the maximum queue length in the supermarket model. The Annals of Probability, 34(2):493--527, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. S. Maguluri, R. Srikant, and L. Ying. Stochastic models of load balancing and scheduling in cloud computing clusters. In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, pages 702--710, Mar 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. S. T. Maguluri, R. Srikant, and L. Ying. Heavy traffic optimal resource allocation algorithms for cloud computing clusters. In Proc. of the 24th International Teletraffic Congress, pages 25:1--25:8, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. X. Meng, V. Pappas, and L. Zhang. Improving the scalability of data center networks with traffic-aware virtual machine placement. In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, pages 1154--1162, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. Mitzenmacher. The power of two choices in randomized load balancing. PhD thesis, UC Berkeley, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. Mitzenmacher. Studying balanced allocations with differential equations. Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 8(5):473--482, Sept. 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. A. Mukhopadhyay and R. R. Mazumdar. Analysis of load balancing in large heterogeneous processor sharing systems. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1311.5806, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Mukhopadhyay, R. R. Mazumdar, and F. Guillemin. Static versus dynamic user assignment to cloud resources. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. J. W. Roberts. A service system with heterogeneous user requirement. In G. Pujolle, editor, Performance of Data Communications Systems and Their Applications, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. R. Srikant and W. Whitt. Simulation run lengths to estimate blocking probabilities. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul., 6(1):7--52, Jan. 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. L. Stolyar. An infinite server system with general packing constraints. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1205.4271, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. A. L. Stolyar and Y. Zhong. An infinite server system with general packing constraints: Asymptotic optimality of a greedy randomized algorithm. In Proc. 53th Annu. Allerton Conf. Commun., Control Comput., pages 575--582, Oct 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. A. L. Stolyar and Y. Zhong. A large-scale service system with packing constraints: Minimizing the number of occupied servers. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., 41(1):41--52, June 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. N. Tsitsiklis and K. Xu. On the power of (even a little) resource pooling. Stochastic Systems, 2(1):1--66, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. N. D. Vvedenskaya, R. L. Dobrushin, and F. I. Karpelevich. Queueing system with selection of the shortest of two queues: An asymptotic approach. Probl. Peredachi Inf., 32(1):20--34, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. L. Wang, F. Zhang, A. V. Vasilakos, C. Hou, and Z. Liu. Joint virtual machine assignment and traffic engineering for green data center networks. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., 41(3):107--112, Jan. 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. W. Whitt. Heavy-traffic approximations for service systems with blocking. AT&T Bell Laboratories Technical Journal, 63(5):689--708, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. L. Ying, R. Srikant, and X. Kang. The power of slightly more than one sample in randomized load balancing. In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Power of d Choices for Large-Scale Bin Packing: A Loss Model

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review
        ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review  Volume 43, Issue 1
        Performance evaluation review
        June 2015
        468 pages
        ISSN:0163-5999
        DOI:10.1145/2796314
        Issue’s Table of Contents
        • cover image ACM Conferences
          SIGMETRICS '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems
          June 2015
          488 pages
          ISBN:9781450334860
          DOI:10.1145/2745844

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 15 June 2015

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader