Abstract
This paper investigates the performance of task assignment policies for server farms, as the variability of job sizes (service demands) approaches infinity. Our results reveal that some common wisdoms regarding task assignment are flawed. The Size-Interval-Task-Assignment policy (SITA), which assigns each server a unique size range, was heretofore thought of by some as the panacea for dealing with high-variability job-size distributions. We show SITA to be inferior to the much simpler greedy policy, Least-Work-Left (LWL), for certain common job-size distributions, including many modal, hyperexponential, and Pareto distributions. We also define regimes where SITA's performance is superior, and prove simple closed-form bounds on its performance for the above-mentioned distributions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
