skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Designing Low-Complexity Heavy-Traffic Delay-Optimal Load Balancing Schemes: Theory to Algorithms

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 December 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this paper, we establish a unified analytical framework for designing load balancing algorithms that can simultaneously achieve low latency, low complexity, and low communication overhead. We first propose a general class \Pi of load balancing policies and prove that they are throughput optimal and heavy-traffic delay optimal. This class \Pi includes popular policies such as join-shortest-queue (JSQ) and power-of-d as special cases, but not the recently proposed join-idle-queue (JIQ) policy. In fact, we show that JIQ is not heavy-traffic delay optimal even for homogeneous servers. By exploiting the flexibility offered by the class \Pi, we design a new load balancing policy called join-below-threshold (JBT-d), in which the arrival jobs are preferably assigned to queues that are no greater than a threshold, and the threshold is updated infrequently. JBT-d has several benefits: (i) JBT-d belongs to the class \Pi and hence is throughput optimal and heavy-traffic delay optimal. (ii) JBT-d has zero dispatching delay, like JIQ and other pull-based policies, and low message overhead due to infrequent threshold update. (iii) Extensive simulations show that JBT-d has excellent delay performance, comparable to the JSQ policy in various system settings.

References

  1. Jeffrey Dean and Sanjay Ghemawat. 2008. MapReduce: simplified data processing on large clusters. Commun. ACM 51, 1 (2008), 107--113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Atilla Eryilmaz and R Srikant. 2012. Asymptotically tight steady-state queue length bounds implied by drift conditions. Queueing Systems 72, 3--4 (2012), 311--359. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. G Foschini and JACK Salz. 1978. A basic dynamic routing problem and diffusion. IEEE Transactions on Communications 26, 3 (1978), 320--327.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Ian Foster, Yong Zhao, Ioan Raicu, and Shiyong Lu. 2008. Cloud computing and grid computing 360-degree compared. In 2008 Grid Computing Environments Workshop. Ieee, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Lars George. 2011. HBase: the definitive guide. " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Varun Gupta, Mor Harchol Balter, Karl Sigman, and Ward Whitt. 2007. Analysis of join-the-shortest-queue routing for web server farms. Performance Evaluation 64, 9 (2007), 1062--1081. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bruce Hajek. 1982. Hitting-time and occupation-time bounds implied by drift analysis with applications. Advances in Applied probability (1982), 502--525.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Yi Lu, Qiaomin Xie, Gabriel Kliot, Alan Geller, James R Larus, and Albert Greenberg. 2011. Join-Idle-Queue: A novel load balancing algorithm for dynamically scalable web services. Performance Evaluation 68, 11 (2011), 1056--1071. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Siva Theja Maguluri, R Srikant, and Lei Ying. 2014. Heavy traffic optimal resource allocation algorithms for cloud computing clusters. Performance Evaluation 81 (2014), 20--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Michael Mitzenmacher. 2001. The power of two choices in randomized load balancing. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 12, 10 (2001), 1094--1104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Michael Mitzenmacher, Balaji Prabhakar, and Devavrat Shah. 2002. Load balancing with memory. In Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings. The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 799--808. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Debankur Mukherjee, Sem C Borst, Johan SH Van Leeuwaarden, Philip A Whiting, et al. 2016. Universality of load balancing schemes on the diffusion scale. Journal of Applied Probability 53, 4 (2016), 1111--1124.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Rajesh Nishtala, Hans Fugal, Steven Grimm, Marc Kwiatkowski, Herman Lee, Harry C Li, Ryan McElroy, Mike Paleczny, Daniel Peek, Paul Saab, et al. 2013. Scaling memcache at facebook. In Presented as part of the 10th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 13). 385--398. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Devavrat Shah and Balaji Prabhakar. 2002. The use of memory in randomized load balancing. In Information Theory, 2002. Proceedings. 2002 IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Alexander L Stolyar. 2015. Pull-based load distribution in large-scale heterogeneous service systems. Queueing Systems 80, 4 (2015), 341--361. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. John N Tsitsiklis and Kuang Xu. 2013. Queueing system topologies with limited flexibility. In ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 41. ACM, 167--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Nikita Dmitrievna Vvedenskaya, Roland L'vovich Dobrushin, and Fridrikh Izrailevich Karpelevich. 1996. Queueing system with selection of the shortest of two queues: An asymptotic approach. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 32, 1 (1996), 20--34.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Weina Wang, Kai Zhu, Lei Ying, Jian Tan, and Li Zhang. 2016. MapTask scheduling in MapReduce with data locality: Throughput and heavy-traffic optimality. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 24, 1 (2016), 190--203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Richard R Weber. 1978. On the optimal assignment of customers to parallel servers. Journal of Applied Probability (1978), 406--413.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Lei Ying, R Srikant, and Xiaohan Kang. 2015. The power of slightly more than one sample in randomized load balancing. In 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM). IEEE, 1131--1139.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Xingyu Zhou, Fei Wu, Jian Tan, Yin Sun, and Ness Shroff. 2017. Designing Low-Complexity Heavy-Traffic Delay- Optimal Load Balancing Schemes: Theory to Algorithms. http://arxiv.org/abs/1710.04357. (Oct. 2017). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Designing Low-Complexity Heavy-Traffic Delay-Optimal Load Balancing Schemes: Theory to Algorithms

        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 Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems
          Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems  Volume 1, Issue 2
          December 2017
          480 pages
          EISSN:2476-1249
          DOI:10.1145/3175501
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2017 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: 19 December 2017
          Published in pomacs Volume 1, Issue 2

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader