1 / 62

Queuing Networks

Queuing Networks. Jean-Yves Le Boudec. Contents. The Class of Multi-Class Product Form Networks The Elements of a Product-Form Network The Product-Form Theorem Computational Aspects What this tells us. 1. Networks of Queues are Important but May Be Tough to Analyze.

kristine
Télécharger la présentation

Queuing Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Queuing Networks Jean-Yves Le Boudec 1

  2. Contents • The Class of Multi-Class Product Form Networks • The Elements of a Product-Form Network • The Product-Form Theorem • Computational Aspects • What this tells us 2

  3. 1. Networks of Queues are Important but May Be Tough to Analyze • Queuing networks are frequently used models • The stability issue may, in general, be a hard one • Necessary condition for stability (Natural Condition) server utilization < 1 at every queue 3

  4. Instability Examples • Poisson arrivals ; jobs go through stations 1,2,1,2,1 thenleave • A job arrives as type 1, thenbecomes 2, then 3 etc • Exponential, independent service times withmeanmi • Priorityscheduling • Station 1 : 5 > 3 >1 • Station 2: 2 > 4 • Q: Whatis the naturalstability condition ? • A: λ (m1 + m3+ m5) < 1 λ (m2 + m4) < 1 4

  5. λ = 1m1 = m3 = m4 = 0.1 m2 = m5 = 0.6 • Utilization factors • Station 1: 0.8 • Station 2: 0.7 • Network is unstable ! • If λ (m1 + … + m5 ) < 1 network is stable; why? 5

  6. Bramson’s Example 1: A Simple FIFO Network • Poisson arrivals; jobs go through stations A, B,B…,B, A then leave • Exponential, independent service times • Steps 2 and last: mean is L • Other steps: mean is S • Q: What is the natural stability condition ? • A: λ ( L + S ) < 1λ ( (J-1)S + L ) < 1 • Bramson showed: may be unstable whereas natural stability condition holds

  7. Bramson’s Example 2A FIFO Network with Arbitrarily Small Utilization Factor • m queues • 2 types of customers • λ = 0.5 each type • routing as shown, … = 7 visits • FIFO • Exponential service times, with mean as shown S S L S S L S S L S S L • Utilization factor atevery station ≤ 4 λS • Network isunstable for S ≤ 0.01L≤ S8m = floor(-2 (log L )/L) 7

  8. Take Home Message • The natural stability condition is necessary but may not be sufficient • We will see a class of networks where this never happens 8

  9. 2. Elements of a Product Form Network • Customers have a class attribute • Customers visit stations according to Markov Routing • External arrivals, if any, are Poisson 2 Stations Class = step, J+3 classes Can youreduce the number of classes ? 9

  10. Chains • Customers can switch class, but remain in the same chain ν 10

  11. Chains may be open or closed • Open chain = with Poisson arrivals. Customers must eventually leave • Closed chain: no arrival, no departure; number of customers is constant • Closed network has only closed chains • Open network has only open chains • Mixed network may have both 11

  12. 3 Stations 4 classes 1 open chain 1 closedchain ν 12

  13. Bramson’s Example 2A FIFO Network with Arbitrarily Small Utilization Factor S S L S S L S S L S S L 2 Stations Many classes 2 open chains Network is open 13

  14. Visit Rates 14

  15. 2 Stations 5 classes 1 chain Network is open Visit ratesθ11 = θ13 =θ15 =θ22 =θ24 =λ θsc = 0 otherwise 15

  16. ν 16

  17. Constraints on Stations • Stations must belong to a restricted catalog of stations • We first see a few examples, then give the complete catalog • Two categories: Insensitive (= Kelly-Whittle) and MSCCC • Example of Category 1 (insensitive station): Global Processor Sharing • One server • Rate of server is shared equally among all customers present • Service requirements for customers of class c are drawn iid from a distribution which depends on the class (and the station) • Example of Category 1 (insensitive station): Delay • Infinite number of servers • Service requirements for customers of class c are drawn iid from a distribution which depends on the class (and the station) • No queuing, service time = service requirement = residence time 17

  18. Example of Category 2 (MSCCC station): FIFO with B servers • B servers • FIFO queueing • Service requirements for customers of class c are drawn iid from an exponential distribution, independent of the class (but may depend on the station) • Example of Category 2 (MSCCC station): MSCCC with B servers • B servers • FIFO queueing with constraints At most one customer of each class is allowed in service • Service requirements for customers of class c are drawn iid from an exponential distribution, independent of the class (but may depend on the station) 18

  19. A • Say which network satisfies the hypotheses for product form B (FIFO, Exp) C (Prio, Exp) 19

  20. A station of Category 1 is any station that satisfies the Kelly-Whittle property • Examples: Global or per-class PS, Global or per-class LCFSPR, Delay 20

  21. Stations of Category 2 must have Exponential, class independent service requirements 21

  22. 22

  23. 3. The Product Form Theorem • Stationary distrib of numbers of customers has product formEach term depends only on the station 23

  24. 24

  25. Stability • Stability depends only on every station in isolation being stable • When service rates are constant, this is the natural condition 25

  26. 26

  27. 27

  28. Product form and independence • In an open network • Product form => independence of stations in stationary regime • No longer true in a closed or mixed network 28

  29. Phase-Type Distributions 29

  30. Phase Type Distributions • Product form theorem requires service times to be • Either exponential (category 2 stations) i.e MSCCC including FIFO) • Or Phase type (category 1 stations) • Phase type distributions can approximate any distribution (for the topology of weak convergence) • Stationary Distribution depends only on mean service time(Insensitivity of category 1) • Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the product form theorem applies if we replace a phase type distribution by any distribution (even heavy tailed) • Was done formally in some cases [8] • Take home message: • Stations of category 1 may have any service time distribution, class dependent • Stations of category 2 must have exponential distrib, class independent 30

  31. 4. Computational AspectsStation Function • The station function, used in the Product Form theorem, is the stationary distribution of the station in isolation 31

  32. 32

  33. 33

  34. 34

  35. 36

  36. 37

  37. Different Stations may have same station equivalent service rate • FIFO single server, global PS and global LCFSPR with class independent mean service time have same station functions • Check this • Therefore they have the same equivalent service rate and have the same effect in a network as long as we are interested in the distribution of numbers of customers • Hence mean response times are the same • But distributions of response times may differ • Compare PS to FIFO 38

  38. Algorithms for Mixed Networks • Open networks: all stations are independent; solve one station in isolation • Mixed Networks: suppress open chains (suppression theorem) • Closed networks: the problem is computing the normalizing constant; • Many methods exist, optimized for different types of very large networks • Convolution algorithms: fairly general, applies to tricky cases (MSCCC), requires storing normalizing constant (large) 39

  39. 40

  40. Throughput Theorem 41

  41. Example • N = nb customers at GateK = total population • Product Form theorem: μ ν 42

  42. 43

  43. Algorithms for Mixed Networks • Open networks: all stations are independent; solve one station in isolation • Mixed Networks: suppress open chains (suppression theorem) • Closed networks: the problem is computing the normalizing constant; • Many methods exist, optimized for different types of very large networks • Convolution algorithms: fairly general, applies to tricky cases (MSCCC), requires storing normalizing constant (large) • Mean Value Analysis does not require computing the normalizing constant, but does not apply (yet ?) to all cases 44

  44. The Arrival Theorem and Mean Value Analysis (MVA) version 1 45

  45. The Arrival Theorem and Mean Value Analysis (MVA) version 1 • MVA version 1 uses the arrival theorem in a closed network where all stations are • FIFO or Delay • or equivalent • Based on 3 equations and iteration on population: • Mean response time for a class c customer at a FIFO station (arrival theorem): • Little’s formula: • Total number of customers gives : 46

  46. 47

  47. 48

  48. MVA Version 2 • Applies to more general networks; • Uses the decomposition and complement network theorems 49

  49. is equivalent to: where the service rate μ*(n4) is the throughput of 50

More Related