Page 1 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Things I Thought I Knew About Queueing Theory, but was Wrong About: Part 1, Multiserver.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Many useful applications, especially in queueing systems, inventory management, and reliability analysis. A connection between discrete time Markov chains.
Advertisements

Scheduling Criteria CPU utilization – keep the CPU as busy as possible (from 0% to 100%) Throughput – # of processes that complete their execution per.
Thrasyvoulos Spyropoulos / Eurecom, Sophia-Antipolis 1  Load-balancing problem  migrate (large) jobs from a busy server to an underloaded.
Performance improvement through Active Idleness José A.A. Moreira Agilent Technologies Germany Carlos F.G. Bispo Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica Instituto.
Queueing Models and Ergodicity. 2 Purpose Simulation is often used in the analysis of queueing models. A simple but typical queueing model: Queueing models.
Page 1 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 16, 2013 Things I Thought I Knew about Queueing Theory, but was Wrong About (Part 2, Service.
 1  Outline  performance measures for a single-server station  discrete-event simulation  hand simulation  process-oriented simulation approach.
© 2006, Monash University, Australia CSE4884 Network Design and Management Lecturer: Dr Carlo Kopp, MIEEE, MAIAA, PEng Lecture 5 Queueing Theory Concepts.
INDR 343 Problem Session
10 Further Time Series OLS Issues Chapter 10 covered OLS properties for finite (small) sample time series data -If our Chapter 10 assumptions fail, we.
Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  2002 Modified for CSCI 399, Royden, Operating System Concepts Operating Systems Lecture 19 Scheduling IV.
Queuing Analysis Based on noted from Appendix A of Stallings Operating System text 6/10/20151.
#11 QUEUEING THEORY Systems Fall 2000 Instructor: Peter M. Hahn
ECS 152A Acknowledgement: slides from S. Kalyanaraman & B.Sikdar
Queuing Systems Chapter 17.
A gentle introduction to fluid and diffusion limits for queues Presented by: Varun Gupta April 12, 2006.
SUMS OF RANDOM VARIABLES Changfei Chen. Sums of Random Variables Let be a sequence of random variables, and let be their sum:
INTEGRALS The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus INTEGRALS In this section, we will learn about: The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and its significance.
Queues / Lines You manage a call center which can answer an average of 20 calls an hour. Your call center gets 17.5 calls in an average hour. On average.
#9 SIMULATION OUTPUT ANALYSIS Systems Fall 2000 Instructor: Peter M. Hahn
1 Performance Evaluation of Computer Networks Objectives  Introduction to Queuing Theory  Little’s Theorem  Standard Notation of Queuing Systems  Poisson.
Data Communication and Networks Lecture 13 Performance December 9, 2004 Joseph Conron Computer Science Department New York University
Management of Waiting Lines
6/25/2015Page 1 Process Scheduling B.Ramamurthy. 6/25/2015Page 2 Introduction An important aspect of multiprogramming is scheduling. The resources that.
Join-the-Shortest-Queue (JSQ) Routing in Web Server Farms
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 ECSE-4670: Computer Communications Netwoks Exam 2: Solutions Time: 75 min (strictly enforced)
Economics 20 - Prof. Anderson
Fundamental Characteristics of Queues with Fluctuating Load VARUN GUPTA Joint with: Mor Harchol-Balter Carnegie Mellon Univ. Alan Scheller-Wolf Carnegie.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute © Shivkumar Kalvanaraman & © Biplab Sikdar1 ECSE-4730: Computer Communication Networks (CCN) Network Layer Performance.
Queuing Networks: Burke’s Theorem, Kleinrock’s Approximation, and Jackson’s Theorem Wade Trappe.
Effect of higher moments of job size distribution on the performance of an M/G/k system VARUN GUPTA Joint work with: Mor Harchol-Balter Carnegie Mellon.
Fundamental Characteristics of Queues with Fluctuating Load (appeared in SIGMETRICS 2006) VARUN GUPTA Joint with: Mor Harchol-Balter Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Effect of higher moments of job size distribution on the performance of an M/G/k system VARUN GUPTA Joint work with: Mor Harchol-Balter Carnegie Mellon.
ORF Electronic Commerce Spring 2009 April 15, 2009 Week 10 Capacity Analysis Deterministic Model –Assume: each HTTP request takes T r (request time)
References for M/G/1 Input Process
Introduction to Queuing Theory
Simulation Output Analysis
Queueing Theory I. Summary Little’s Law Queueing System Notation Stationary Analysis of Elementary Queueing Systems  M/M/1  M/M/m  M/M/1/K  …
Management of Waiting Lines McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
CS433 Modeling and Simulation Lecture 13 Queueing Theory Dr. Anis Koubâa 03 May 2009 Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud University.
1 1 Slide © 2001 South-Western College Publishing/Thomson Learning Anderson Sweeney Williams Anderson Sweeney Williams Slides Prepared by JOHN LOUCKS QUANTITATIVE.
MIT Fun queues for MIT The importance of queues When do queues appear? –Systems in which some serving entities provide some service in a shared.
NETE4631:Capacity Planning (2)- Lecture 10 Suronapee Phoomvuthisarn, Ph.D. /
Introduction to Queueing Theory
Networks of Queues Plan for today (lecture 6): Last time / Questions? Product form preserving blocking Interpretation traffic equations Kelly / Whittle.
Queuing Theory Basic properties, Markovian models, Networks of queues, General service time distributions, Finite source models, Multiserver queues Chapter.
1 Elements of Queuing Theory The queuing model –Core components; –Notation; –Parameters and performance measures –Characteristics; Markov Process –Discrete-time.
Waiting Lines and Queuing Models. Queuing Theory  The study of the behavior of waiting lines Importance to business There is a tradeoff between faster.
Modeling and Analysis of Computer Networks
Queuing Networks Jean-Yves Le Boudec 1. Contents 1.The Class of Multi-Class Product Form Networks 2.The Elements of a Product-Form Network 3.The Product-Form.
1 Chapters 8 Overview of Queuing Analysis. Chapter 8 Overview of Queuing Analysis 2 Projected vs. Actual Response Time.
Analysis and Design of Asynchronous Transfer Lines as a series of G/G/m queues.
Network Design and Analysis-----Wang Wenjie Queuing Theory III: 1 © Graduate University, Chinese academy of Sciences. Network Design and Performance Analysis.
Chapter 15 – CTRW Continuous Time Random Walks. Random Walks So far we have been looking at random walks with the following Langevin equation  is a.
1 Parrondo's Paradox. 2 Two losing games can be combined to make a winning game. Game A: repeatedly flip a biased coin (coin a) that comes up head with.
Chapter 20 Queuing Theory to accompany Operations Research: Applications and Algorithms 4th edition by Wayne L. Winston Copyright (c) 2004 Brooks/Cole,
Chapter 6 Queueing Models
Management of Waiting Lines Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent.
Mohammad Khalily Islamic Azad University.  Usually buffer size is finite  Interarrival time and service times are independent  State of the system.
MODELING AND SIMULATION CS 313 Simulation Examples 1.
Theory of Computational Complexity Probability and Computing Lee Minseon Iwama and Ito lab M1 1.
Managerial Decision Making Chapter 13 Queuing Models.
Serve Assignment Policies
Modeling and Simulation CS 313
Finite M/M/1 queue Consider an M/M/1 queue with finite waiting room.
ECE 358 Examples #1 Xuemin (Sherman) Shen Office: EIT 4155
Generalized Jackson Networks (Approximate Decomposition Methods)
Lecture 4: Algorithmic Methods for G/M/1 and M/G/1 type models
Presentation transcript:

Page 1 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Things I Thought I Knew About Queueing Theory, but was Wrong About: Part 1, Multiserver Queues Alan Scheller-Wolf Tepper School of Business Carnegie Mellon University Joint work with Karl Sigman, Rein Vesilo, and Michele Dufalla

Page 2 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 A Great Day As a graduate student, one of the greatest things that can happen is the following: Student: “I can prove that XXX is true!” Advisor: “That can’t be right, everyone knows YYY is true.” Student: “I know, but I can prove it.” Advisor: “There must be a bug, show me.” Time passes... Advisor: “Huh, you are right, XXX is true!”

Page 3 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 My Goals Take you through “my great day” as a student Help you understand why everyone believed YYY Help you understand, mathematically, why XXX is true Help you see why, intuitively, XXX “has to be true” Discuss what general insights this gives

Page 4 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Mean Delay in GI/GI/1 Queues i.i.d. arrivals ~ T rate  i.i.d. service ~ S  rate  Jobs are served in a FIFO (FCFS) fashion Delay: Time customers spend in queue Question: What are conditions for mean (stationary) delay to be finite? Kiefer and Wolfowitz (K&W, 1956)    E[D] finite iff E[S 2 ] finite Single Server Queue S should be “heavy tailed” -- think Pareto distribution

Page 5 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Why is E[S 2 ] Necessary (for Single-Server Queues)? The inspection paradox  A randomly arriving job sees an equilibrium service time S e (or the excess of a service time)  Length biasing causes the tail of S e [P(S e >x)] to behave as the integrated tail of S – you are more likely to “see” longer service times  E[S e ] is finite iff E[S 2 ] is finite The upshot: If an arriving job “sees” a job in service, this job has mean remaining size on the order of E[S 2 ]. The arriving job can’t enter service until this job is done.

Page 6 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Why is E[S 2 ] Sufficient (for Single-Server Queues)? (I) The Lindley Equation (Lindley, 1952)  D n+1 = (D n +S n -T n ) +, where S n is the service time of customer n and T n is the interarrival time between customers n and n+1  Why?  Let’s say customer n arrives at time   Then customer n leaves service at time  +D n +S n  Customer n+1 arrives at time  T n  Customer n+1 enters service at time min{  +D n +S n,  T n }  Customer n+1’s delay is min{  +D n +S n,  T n } – (  T n ) This is a reflected random walk

Page 7 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Why is E[S 2 ] Sufficient (for Single-Server Queues)? (II) Reflected Random Walks: For Z n+1 = (Z n +X n ) +, E[Z 2 ] is finite if:  E[(X + ) 2 ] is finite  E[X n ] < -  for all n and on every sample path For our GI/GI/1 queue:  E[(X + ) 2 ] = E[S 2 ] is finite  E[X n ] = E[S] - E[T] < -  ; for all n and on every sample path, since 

Page 8 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Mean Delay in GI/GI/k Queues i.i.d. arrivals ~ T rate  i.i.d. service ~ S  rate  Question: What are conditions for mean stationary delay to be finite? K&W, 1956   k   E[D] finite if E[S 2 ] finite Multi-Server Queue

Page 9 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Why is E[S 2 ] Sufficient? Split the GI/GI/k into k GI/GI/1 queues  This performs no better than the original system Route arriving jobs to queues in cyclic (or round robin) fashion Each GI/GI/1 queue has finite mean delay Therefore the original GI/GI/k queue has finite mean delay as well

Page 10 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 What about Necessity? “Everyone knew” that  k  E[S 2 ] finite were necessary as well. This had even appeared in the literature.

Page 11 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Pictorially: Requirement for finite mean delay 1 2 Servers 1234 ∞

Page 12 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Back to the GI/GI/1 Why is finite E[S 2 ] Necessary? The inspection paradox  If an arriving job “sees” a job in service, this job has mean remaining size on the order of E[S 2 ]. The arriving job can’t enter service until this job is done. Does this logic hold for the GI/GI/k? NO! Can we capture this effect mathematically?

Page 13 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Lindley Equation for GI/GI/1 Our logic for GI/GI/1  Let’s say customer n arrives at time   Then customer n leaves service at time  +D n +S n  Customer n+1 arrives at time  T n  Customer n+1 enters service at time min{  +D n +S n,  T n }  Customer n+1’s delay is min{  +D n +S n,  T n } – (  T n ) D n+1 = (D n +S n -T n ) +

Page 14 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Lindley Equation for GI/GI/k For GI/GI/k  Let’s say customer n arrives at time   Then customer n leaves service at time  +D n +S n  Customer n+1 arrives at time  T n  Customer n+1 enters service at time min{  +D n +S n,  T n } NO!

Page 15 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 When Does Customer n+1 Enter Service? (I) Customer n arrives at time  Customer n leaves service at time  +D n +S n n n+1 j

Page 16 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 When Does Customer n+1 Enter Service? (II) When does customer j leave service?  Let’s say that when customer n enters service, she looks over at the other server, and observes the amount of time customer j has left  Let’s call this amount of time U n  Then customer j leaves service at time  +D n +U n n n+1 j If there were multiple other servers, U n would be the minimum remaining time

Page 17 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 When Does Customer n+1 Enter Service? (III) n n+1 j Customer n leaves service at time  +D n +S n Customer j leaves service at time  +D n +U n So the next server comes free at time  +D n +min{S n,U n } =  +D n +P n

Page 18 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Lindley Equation for GI/GI/k For GI/GI/k: D n+1 = (D n +P n -T n ) + How big of difference could one letter make? We have replaced S n with P n

Page 19 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Back to Reflected Random Walks For our GI/GI/k queue, for finite mean delay it is sufficient that:  E[(X + ) 2 ] = E[P 2 ] is finite  E[X n ] = E[P n ] - E[T n ] < -  ; for all n and on every sample path How does this help? We don’t know the first thing about P!

Page 20 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 When is E[P 2 ] Finite? E[P 2 ] = E[min{S,U} 2 ] = E[min{S,U} 3/2 min{S,U} 1/2 ] < E[S 3/2 U 1/2 ] = E[S 3/2 ] E[U 1/2 ] And E[U 1/2 ] < E[W 1/2 ] And E[W 1/2 ] is finite iff E[S 3/2 ] (K&W, 1956) So for a GI/GI/2 queue, E[P 2 ] is finite if E[S 3/2 ] is finite! S is independent of U W is the total work in system

Page 21 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 What about Negative Drift? E[X n ] = E[P n ] - E[T n ] = E[min{S n,U n }] - E[T n ] < E[S n ] - E[T n ] = E[S] - E[T] This seems like a really weak bound, but is in fact the best we can do, since this must hold on all sample paths and for all n; U n could be arbitrarily large on a sample path I have negative drift for all n on every sample path if E[S] < E[T] (  < ½) but not otherwise

Page 22 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Finite Mean Delay in GI/GI/2 (I) So it appears that: Finite E[S 3/2 ] is sufficient for finite mean delay in GI/GI/2 queues if E[S] < E[T] Finite E[S 3/2 ] is not sufficient for finite mean delay in GI/GI/2 queues if E[T] < E[S] < 2E[T] Does this make sense? YES!

Page 23 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Finite Mean Delay in GI/GI/2 (II) The inspection paradox  If an arriving job “sees” a job in service, this job has mean remaining size on the order of E[S 2 ]  The mean time this job has been in service also is on the order of E[S 2 ]  The key question is what has been going on while this long job has been in service

Page 24 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Finite Mean Delay in GI/GI/2 (III) If E[T] < E[S] < 2E[T]:  While a single extremely large job is in service the remaining server cannot keep up with the workload, and the system “crashes” If E[S] < E[T]:  A single extremely large job is not typically enough to crash the system – the remaining server can keep up with the workload  It takes two extremely large jobs to crash the system

Page 25 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Redefining  For a k-server queue  is traditionally defined as  k  This is WRONG! If instead   E[S] < E[T] means  and we have a “spare server” to absorb the workload if a long job arrives  E[T] < E[S] < 2E[T] means 1<  and we have no spare capacity  denotes the number of servers needed to handle the mean load on the system

Page 26 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 What about GI/GI/3? If 2<  <3 (no spare servers): E[D] is finite if E[S 2 ] is finite If 1<  <2 (one spare server): E[D] is finite if E[S 3/2 ] is finite If 0<  <1 (two spare servers): E[D] is finite if E[S 4/3 ] is finite

Page 27 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 What about GI/GI/k? If k-1<  <k (no spare servers): E[D] is finite if E[S 2 ] is finite If k-2<  <k-1 (one spare server): E[D] is finite if E[S 3/2 ] is finite If j<  <j+1 (k-j-1 spare servers): E[D] is finite if E[S (k+1-j)/(k-j) ] is finite

Page 28 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Pictorially: Fixed Number of Spare Servers Requirement for finite mean delay 1 2 Servers 1234 ∞ No spare servers One spare server Two spare servers 3/2 4/3 Diminishing benefits For moment conditions, 20-server queue with load 18.5 is the same as a 2-server queue with load 0.5 Pictorially:

Page 29 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Pictorially: As Spare Servers Grow Requirement for finite mean delay 1 2 Servers 1234 ∞ 3/2 4/3 As the number of spare servers approaches infinity, the moment conditions approach those of an infinite-server queue, as they should

Page 30 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Other Results (I) Higher Moments:  If j<  <j+1 (k-j-1 spare servers): E[D r ] is finite if E[S(k+r-j)/(k-j) ] is finite (r has replaced 1 in the previous formula)  If you have just two spare servers, E[D 2 ] is finite if E[S 5/3 ] is finite – you get finite variance of delay without finite variance of service time

Page 31 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Other Results (II) Necessary Conditions:  The sufficient conditions above are also provably necessary for all but a small set of service time distributions

Page 32 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Other Results (III) Integral Load:  Drift has been crucial in our analysis – if  E[S 3/2 ] is sufficient for finite mean delay; if  we require E[S 2 ]  What if   We have been able to show that E[S 3/2 ] is not sufficient, but have not been able to get close to showing E[S 2 ] is necessary  We are still working

Page 33 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Insights Delay moments in multi-server queues with heavy- tailed service times depend on the moments of S and the number of spare servers   is most usefully defined as for multi- server queues Adding spare serves helps with delay moments, but in diminishing fashion This works because under heavy-tailed service times queues build up due to large jobs blocking servers

Page 34 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Open Problems 1.Dependencies:  Everything we showed was for GI/GI/k; what if interarrival and/or service times are not i.i.d?  Our “Lindley” equation for the GI/GI/k: D n+1 = (D n +P n -T n ) + also holds for a special type of GI/G/1 queue. (It actually defines a GI/G/1 queue.) So there must be a relationship/duality here.

Page 35 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Open Problems (II) 2.Bounds:  As of now, the best analytical bounds on multi- server delay under heavy-tailed service time are in general very poor  These cannot, in general, be easily simulated  See work by Daley, Scheller-Wolf, Vesilo

Page 36 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Open Problems (III) Tail Asymptotics  Moment conditions for delay are really just a proxy for what we really want to know: How the tail of the delay distribution behaves  See work by Boxma, Foss, Korshunov, Whitt, Zwart

Page 37 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 References Scheller-Wolf, A. (2003). Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Delay Moments in FIFO Multiserver Queues: Why s Slow Servers are Better than One Fast Server for Heavy-Tailed Systems. Operations Research 51, No. 5, Scheller-Wolf, A. and R. Vesilo (2006). Structural Interpretation and Derivation of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Delay Moments in FIFO Multiserver Queues. Queueing Systems, 54, No

Page 38 Alan Scheller-Wolf Lunteren, The Netherlands January 15, 2013 Dank U! Any Questions?