Abstract
In this paper, we consider the following dynamic fair allocation problem: Given a sequence of job arrivals and departures, the goal is to maintain an approximately fair allocation of the resource against a target fair allocation policy, while minimizing the total number of \em disruptions, which is the number of times the allocation of any job is changed. We consider a rich class of fair allocation policies that significantly generalize those considered in previous work. We first consider the models where jobs only arrive, or jobs only depart. We present tight upper and lower bounds for the number of disruptions required to maintain a constant approximate fair allocation every time step. In particular, for the canonical case where jobs have weights and the resource allocation is proportional to the job's weight, we show that maintaining a constant approximate fair allocation requires Θ(łog^* n) disruptions per job, almost matching the bounds in prior work for the unit weight case. For the more general setting where the allocation policy only decreases the allocation to a job when new jobs arrive, we show that maintaining a constant approximate fair allocation requires Θ(łog n) disruptions per job. We then consider the model where jobs can both arrive and depart. We first show strong lower bounds on the number of disruptions required to maintain constant approximate fairness for arbitrary instances. In contrast we then show that there there is an algorithm that can maintain constant approximate fairness with $O(1)$ expected disruptions per job if the weights of the jobs are independent of the jobs arrival and departure order. We finally show how our results can be extended to the setting with multiple resources.
- Gerdus Benade, Aleksandr M. Kazachkov, Ariel D. Procaccia, and Christos-Alexandros Psomas. How to make envy vanish over time. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, Ithaca, NY, USA, June 18--22, 2018, pages 593--610, 2018.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Arka A. Bhattacharya, David Culler, Eric Friedman, Ali Ghodsi, Scott Shenker, and Ion Stoica. Hierarchical scheduling for diverse datacenter workloads. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Cloud Computing, SOCC '13, pages 4:1--4:15, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bryan L. Deuermeyer, Donald K. Friesen, and Michael A. Langston. Scheduling to maximize the minimum processor finish time in a multiprocessor system. SIAM Journal on Algebraic Discrete Methods, 3(2):190--196, 1982.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Danny Dolev, Dror G. Feitelson, Joseph Y. Halpern, Raz Kupferman, and Nathan Linial. No justified complaints: On fair sharing of multiple resources. In Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS '12, pages 68--75, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jeff Edmonds and Kirk Pruhs. Scalably scheduling processes with arbitrary speedup curves. In ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 685--692, 2009.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Rupert Freeman, Seyed Majid Zahedi, and Vincent Conitzer. Fair and efficient social choice in dynamic settings. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-17, pages 4580--4587, 2017.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Eric Friedman, Ali Ghodsi, and Christos-Alexandros Psomas. Strategyproof allocation of discrete jobs on multiple machines. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC '14, pages 529--546, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Eric Friedman, Christos-Alexandros Psomas, and Shai Vardi. Dynamic fair division with minimal disruptions. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC '15, pages 697--713, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Eric Friedman, Christos-Alexandros Psomas, and Shai Vardi. Controlled dynamic fair division. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC '17, pages 461--478, New York, NY, USA, 2017. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ali Ghodsi, Matei Zaharia, Benjamin Hindman, Andy Konwinski, Scott Shenker, and Ion Stoica. Dominant resource fairness: Fair allocation of multiple resource types. In Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, NSDI'11, pages 323--336, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2011. USENIX Association.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. L. Graham. Bounds on multiprocessing timing anomalies. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 17(2):416--429, 1969.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Aanund Hylland and Richard Zeckhauser. The efficient allocation of individuals to positions. Journal of Political Economy, 87(2):293--314, 1979.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Kamesh Munagala. Competitive algorithms from competitive equilibria: Non-clairvoyant scheduling under polyhedral constraints. In Proceedings of the Forty-sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '14, pages 313--322, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Michael Isard, Vijayan Prabhakaran, Jon Currey, Udi Wieder, Kunal Talwar, and Andrew Goldberg. Quincy: Fair scheduling for distributed computing clusters. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 22Nd Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, SOSP '09, pages 261--276, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ian Kash, Ariel D. Procaccia, and Nisarg Shah. No agent left behind: Dynamic fair division of multiple resources. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, AAMAS '13, pages 351--358, Richland, SC, 2013. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
- Bo Li, Wenyang Li, and Yingkai Li. Dynamic fair division problem with general valuations. In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI'18, pages 375--381. AAAI Press, 2018.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bo Li and Yingkai Li. Dynamic fair division problem with general valuations. CoRR, abs/1802.05294, 2018.Google Scholar
- Dejan S. Milo'jivciç, Fred Douglis, Yves Paindaveine, Richard Wheeler, and Songnian Zhou. Process migration. ACM Comput. Surv., 32(3):241--299, September 2000.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- David C. Parkes, Ariel D. Procaccia, and Nisarg Shah. Beyond dominant resource fairness: Extensions, limitations, and indivisibilities. ACM Trans. Econ. Comput., 3(1):3:1--3:22, March 2015.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Malte Schwarzkopf, Andy Konwinski, Michael Abd-El-Malek, and John Wilkes. Omega: flexible, scalable schedulers for large compute clusters. 2013.Google Scholar
- Hal R Varian. Equity, envy, and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory, 9(1):63 -- 91, 1974.Google Scholar
- Abhishek Verma, Luis Pedrosa, Madhukar Korupolu, David Oppenheimer, Eric Tune, and John Wilkes. Large-scale cluster management at google with borg. In Proceedings of the Tenth European Conference on Computer Systems, EuroSys '15, pages 18:1--18:17, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- T. Walsh. Online Cake Cutting (published version). ArXiv e-prints, June 2011.Google Scholar
- W. Wang, B. Li, and B. Liang. Dominant resource fairness in cloud computing systems with heterogeneous servers. In IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pages 583--591, April 2014.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- S. M. Zahedi and B. C. Lee. Sharing incentives and fair division for multiprocessors. IEEE Micro, 35(3):92--100, May 2015.Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Dynamic Weighted Fairness with Minimal Disruptions
Recommendations
Dynamic Weighted Fairness with Minimal Disruptions
SIGMETRICS '20: Abstracts of the 2020 SIGMETRICS/Performance Joint International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer SystemsIn this paper, we consider the following dynamic fair allocation problem: Given a sequence of job arrivals and departures, the goal is to maintain an approximately fair allocation of the resource against a target fair allocation policy, while minimizing ...
Dynamic Weighted Fairness with Minimal Disruptions
In this paper, we consider the following dynamic fair allocation problem: Given a sequence of job arrivals and departures, the goal is to maintain an approximately fair allocation of the resource against a target fair allocation policy, while minimizing ...
Two Machine Scheduling under Disruptions with Transportation Considerations
Effective logistics scheduling requires synchronization of manufacturing and delivery to optimize customer service at minimum total cost. In this paper, we study a new scheduling problem that arises in a disruption environment. Such a problem occurs ...






Comments