Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78dcdb465f-8p2q5 Total loading time: 0.589 Render date: 2021-04-15T16:56:36.812Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Steady-state analysis of load-balancing algorithms in the sub-Halfin–Whitt regime

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2020

Xin Liu
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Lei Ying
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Corresponding

Abstract

We study a class of load-balancing algorithms for many-server systems (N servers). Each server has a buffer of size $b-1$ with $b=O(\sqrt{\log N})$ , i.e. a server can have at most one job in service and $b-1$ jobs queued. We focus on the steady-state performance of load-balancing algorithms in the heavy traffic regime such that the load of the system is $\lambda = 1 - \gamma N^{-\alpha}$ for $0<\alpha<0.5$ and $\gamma > 0,$ which we call the sub-Halfin–Whitt regime ( $\alpha=0.5$ is the so-called Halfin–Whitt regime). We establish a sufficient condition under which the probability that an incoming job is routed to an idle server is 1 asymptotically (as $N \to \infty$ ) at steady state. The class of load-balancing algorithms that satisfy the condition includes join-the-shortest-queue, idle-one-first, join-the-idle-queue, and power-of-d-choices with $d\geq \frac{r}{\gamma}N^\alpha\log N$ (r a positive integer). The proof of the main result is based on the framework of Stein’s method. A key contribution is to use a simple generator approximation based on state space collapse.

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
© Applied Probability Trust 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Banerjee, S. and Mukherjee, D. (2018). Join-the-shortest queue diffusion limit in Halfin–Whitt regime: Tail asymptotics and scaling of extrema. arXiv:1803.03306.Google Scholar
Bertsimas, D., Gamarnik, D. and Tsitsiklis, J. N. (2001). Performance of multiclass Markovian queueing networks via piecewise linear Lyapunov functions. Ann. Appl. Prob. 11, 13841428.Google Scholar
Braverman, A. (2018). Steady-state analysis of the join the shortest queue model in the Halfin–Whitt regime. arXiv:1801.05121.Google Scholar
Braverman, A. and Dai, J. G. (2017). Stein’s method for steady-state diffusion approximations of $m/\mathit{Ph}/n+m$ systems. Ann. Appl. Prob. 27, 550581.10.1214/16-AAP1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braverman, A., Dai, J. G. and Feng, J. (2016). Stein’s method for steady-state diffusion approximations: An introduction through the Erlang-A and Erlang-C models. Stoch. Syst. 6, 301366.10.1287/15-SSY212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eschenfeldt, P. and Gamarnik, D. (2018). Join the shortest queue with many servers. The heavy-traffic asymptotics. Math. Operat. Res. 43, 867886.Google Scholar
Gast, N. (2017). Expected values estimated via mean-field approximation are $1/n$-accurate. Proc. ACM Meas. Anal. Comput. Syst. 1, 17:117:26.Google Scholar
Gast, N. and Van Houdt, B. (2018). A refined mean field approximation. In Proc. Ann. ACM SIGMETRICS Conf., Irvine, CA.10.1145/3219617.3219663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, V. and Walton, N. (2017). Load balancing in the non-degenerate slowdown regime. arXiv:1707.01969.Google Scholar
Liu, X. and Ying, L. (2018). On achieving zero delay with power-of-d-choices load balancing. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Computer Communications (INFOCOM), Honolulu, Hawaii.10.1109/INFOCOM.2018.8485827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, Y., Xie, Q., Kliot, G., Geller, A., Larus, J. R. and Greenberg, A. (2011). Join-Idle-Queue: A novel load balancing algorithm for dynamically scalable web services. Performance Evaluation 68, 10561071.10.1016/j.peva.2011.07.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitzenmacher, M. (1996). The power of two choices in randomized load balancing. Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, D., Borst, S. C., van Leeuwaarden, J. S. and Whiting, P. A. (2016). Universality of power-of-d load balancing in many-server systems. arXiv:1612.00723.Google Scholar
Stolyar, A. (2015). Pull-based load distribution in large-scale heterogeneous service systems. Queueing Syst. 80, 341361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolyar, A. (2015). Tightness of stationary distributions of a flexible-server system in the Halfin–Whitt asymptotic regime. Stoch. Syst. 5, 239267.10.1287/14-SSY139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Boor, M., Borst, S. C., van Leeuwaarden, J. S. and Mukherjee, D. (2017). Scalable load balancing in networked systems: Universality properties and stochastic coupling methods. arXiv:1712.08555.Google Scholar
Vvedenskaya, N. D., Dobrushin, R. L. and Karpelevich, F. I. (1996). Queueing system with selection of the shortest of two queues: An asymptotic approach. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 32, 2034.Google Scholar
Wang, W., Maguluri, S. T., Srikant, R. and Ying, L. (2017). Heavy-traffic delay insensitivity in connection-level models of data transfer with proportionally fair bandwidth sharing. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance 45, 232245.10.1145/3199524.3199565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, R. R. (1978). On the optimal assignment of customers to parallel servers. J. Appl. Prob. 15, 406413.10.2307/3213411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winston, W. (1977). Optimality of the shortest line discipline. J. Appl. Prob. 14, 181189.10.2307/3213271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ying, L. (2016). On the approximation error of mean-field models. In Proc. Ann. ACM SIGMETRICS Conf., Antibes Juan-les-Pins, France, pp. 285297.10.1145/2964791.2901463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ying, L. (2017). Stein’s method for mean field approximations in light and heavy traffic regimes. Proc. ACM Meas. Anal. Comput. Syst. 1, 12:112:27.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 45
Total number of PDF views: 66 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 16th July 2020 - 15th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Steady-state analysis of load-balancing algorithms in the sub-Halfin–Whitt regime
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Steady-state analysis of load-balancing algorithms in the sub-Halfin–Whitt regime
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Steady-state analysis of load-balancing algorithms in the sub-Halfin–Whitt regime
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *