Cited by 61Cloud Computing and Resource ManagementReal-Time Systems SchedulingDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems

Resource and Deadline-Aware Job Scheduling in Dynamic Hadoop Clusters

Cheng, Dazhao, Rao, Jia, Jiang, Changjun, Zhou, Xiaobo·2015·2015 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium

Abstract

As Hadoop is becoming increasingly popular in large-scale data analysis, there is a growing need for providing predictable services to users who have strict requirements on job completion times. While earliest deadline first scheduling (EDF) like algorithms are popular in guaranteeing job deadlines in real-time systems, they are not effective in a dynamic Hadoop environment, i.e., a Hadoop cluster with dynamically available resources. As there is a growing number of Hadoop clusters deployed on hybrid systems, e.g., infrastructure powered by mix of traditional and renewable energy, and cloud platforms hosting heterogeneous workloads, variable resource availability becomes common when running Hadoop jobs. In this paper, we propose, RDS, a Resource and Deadline-aware Hadoop job Scheduler that takes future resource availability into consideration when minimizing job deadline misses. We formulate the job scheduling problem as an online optimization problem and solve it using an efficient receding horizon control algorithm. To aid the control, we design a self-learning model to estimate job completion times and use a simple but effective model to predict future resource availability. We have implemented RDS in the open source Hadoop implementation and performed evaluations with various benchmark workloads. Experimental results show that RDS substantially reduces the penalty of deadline misses by at least 36% and 10% compared with Fair Scheduler and EDF scheduler, respectively.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/ipdps.2015.36

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both labor needs and supply in algorithmic scheduling rely on algorithmic estimation.

    “Both needs and supply rely on algorithmic estimation, with the precise prediction of needs in workforce based on information such as expected or real-time customer traffic, deadlines, real-time monitoring of fluctuating demand, weather forecasts, or on previous occupancy at the same date (Cheng, Rao, Jiang, & Zhou, 2015;Hoshino, Slobodin, & Bernoudy, 2018).”

    From Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs (2022) · cites this paper as Cheng, Rao, Jiang, & Zhou, 2015

  • Calculation of the best matching labor supply is based on information such as availabilities, performance scores, customer ratings, predicted performance, location, or skills set.

    “Calculation of the best matching labor supply is based on information such as the availabilities of workers (or real-time app-active workers, in the case of platforms), their respective performance scores and their previous customer ratings, predicted performance, location or skills set (Cheng et al., 2015;Levy & Barocas, 2018;Moore & Hayes, 2018).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, D., Rao, J., Jiang, C., & Zhou, X.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
  • Tongji University (CN)
Venue
2015 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-05
Pages
956-965
ISSN
1530-2075 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1545686965
Cited by
61
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 3
FWCI
7.53
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Real-Time Systems Scheduling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Keywords
deadline-aware scheduling, dynamic resource availability, earliest deadline first, model predictive control, online optimization, resource availability prediction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review