CHARACTERISTICS OF FAIRNESS METRICS AND THEIR EFFECT ON PERCEIVED SCHEDULER EFFECTIVENESS.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	CHARACTERISTICS OF FAIRNESS METRICS AND THEIR EFFECT ON PERCEIVED SCHEDULER EFFECTIVENESS.
Authors:	Ngubiri, J.¹ ngubiri@cit.mak.ac.ug, van Vliet, M.² mario@cs.ru.nl
Source:	International Journal of Computers & Applications. 2010, Vol. 32 Issue 2, p188-196. 9p.
Subjects:	Computer scheduling, Sequential scheduling, Time-sharing computer systems, Computer systems, Computer architecture
Abstract:	Parallel job schedulers are mostly evaluated using performance metrics. Deductions however can be misleading due to selective job starvation (unfairness). To choose a better scheduler, therefore, there is a need to compare schedulers for fairness as well. Performance and fairness, however, have mostly been studied independently. We examine characteristics of three approaches to fairness evaluation in parallel job scheduling. We examine how they represent job starvation and other aspects of discrimination. We show that the implied unfairness is not always starvation/discrimination in practice. We use simultaneous consideration of performance and fairness and compare deductions with scheduler effectiveness derived from group-wise performance evaluation. We observe that due to possible misrepresentation of starvation by fairness metrics, schedulers shown as superior may not be so in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of International Journal of Computers & Applications is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Engineering Source

Description
Abstract:	Parallel job schedulers are mostly evaluated using performance metrics. Deductions however can be misleading due to selective job starvation (unfairness). To choose a better scheduler, therefore, there is a need to compare schedulers for fairness as well. Performance and fairness, however, have mostly been studied independently. We examine characteristics of three approaches to fairness evaluation in parallel job scheduling. We examine how they represent job starvation and other aspects of discrimination. We show that the implied unfairness is not always starvation/discrimination in practice. We use simultaneous consideration of performance and fairness and compare deductions with scheduler effectiveness derived from group-wise performance evaluation. We observe that due to possible misrepresentation of starvation by fairness metrics, schedulers shown as superior may not be so in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	1206212X
DOI:	10.1080/1206212X.2010.11441974