1 / 27

Packet Scheduling: SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q

Packet Scheduling: SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q. Yongho Seok. Contents. Review: GPS, PGPS SCFQ( Self-clocked fair queuing ) STFQ( Start time fair queuing ) WF2Q( Worst-case fair weighted fair queuing ) Conclusion. GPS.

tess
Télécharger la présentation

Packet Scheduling: SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q

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. Packet Scheduling:SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q Yongho Seok

  2. Contents • Review: GPS, PGPS • SCFQ( Self-clocked fair queuing ) • STFQ( Start time fair queuing ) • WF2Q( Worst-case fair weighted fair queuing ) • Conclusion

  3. GPS • An idealized policy that can split bandwidth among multiple sessions simultaneously • Each session I has a queue and a weight • At time t, GPS serves all non-empty queues simultaneously in proportion to • Property

  4. GPS(Cont’) • Observation : • Guaranteed service rate for session j whenever it becomes backlogged • Another View • Weighted round robin with infinitely small service amount

  5. PGPS • Intuition • Compute the time a packet would complete service had we been serving packets with a GPS server, then serve packets in order of these finishing times • emulates GPS “on the side” and uses the results of this simulation to determine service order • Three virtual times • Not real time, but time for representing the amount of service • Virtual Star time, Virtual Finish time : each flow • Virtual System time : system-wide time

  6. Virtual Start Time Virtual Finish Time Virtual Time Implementation of WFQ PGPS(Cont’)

  7. PGPS(Cont’)

  8. WFQ : Scheduling Example • Situation • Three sessions : A, B, and C • Time 0 : packets of size 1(A), 2(B), and 2(C) arrives • Time 4 : a packet of size 2(A) arrives • Assumption • Weight are all same • Link Capacity C = 1

  9. Result comparison(GPS, WFQ) GPS 0 3 5.5 6 7 4 WFQ 0 1 3 5 7

  10. A 3.5 B,C 3 V(t) 2.5 Virtual Time F(0) = Max(0,0) + 2 = 2 2 1.5 F(0) = Max(0,0) + 1 = 1 1 0.5 Slope = C / weighted sum of backlogged flows = 1/3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Real Time(At time 0)

  11. A 3.5 B,C 3 V(t) 2.5 Virtual Time 2 1.5 Flow A is unbacklogged in WFQ at time 1 1 Flow A is unbacklogged in GPS at time 3 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Real Time(AT time 3)

  12. 2nd packet of size 2 arrives A 3.5 F(4) = Max(1.5,1) + 2 = 3.5 B,C 3 V(t) 2.5 Virtual Time 2 1.5 Slope = 1/2 1 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Real Time(At time 4)

  13. A 3.5 B,C 3 V(t) 2.5 Virtual Time Flow B or C is unbacklogged in GPS at time 5.5 2 Slope = 1/3 1.5 1 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Real Time(At time 5.5)

  14. A 3.5 B,C 3 V(t) Slope = 1 2.5 Virtual Time 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Real Time(At time 7)

  15. Fairness of WFQ • The difference between GPS and WFQ • Cannot fall behind GPS by one packet • One Packet difference means • Problem • Cannot fall behind GPS by one packet, however, can fall ahead GPS by infinite amount • Motivation of WF2Q

  16. Self-Clocked Fair Queuing (SCFQ) • Same as WFQ except • CF : the virtual finish time of the packet currently in service • Easier to implement than WFQ

  17. Relative Fairness & Absolute Fairness • The service rate allocated to connection I at the kth switch on its path from source to its destination • Relative Fairness • Absolute Fairness

  18. Fairness of SCFQ • The author has shown that the relative fairness bound for SCFQ is • But, the absolute fairness bounded for SCFQ is currently unknown • Although the SCFQ round number update rule is easy to implement, it can be unfair over short term scales

  19. Fairness of SCFQ(Cont’) • Worst-case latency for SCFQ is compared to for WFQ • STFQ improve a large worst case delay and short-term unfairness

  20. Start-time Fair Queuing (STFQ) • Same as WFQ except • SF : the virtual start time of the packet currently in service • Serves the packet having smallest virtual start time • Easier to implement than WFQ • Note

  21. Worst-case Fair Weighted Fair Queuing (WF2Q) • Conceptually, • S(t) : the total amount of service received by flow I • V(t) : the total amount of service , which would be received in GPS • WF2Q algorithm • WFQ scheduling + eligibility test • eligible test • Among packets that have started service under GPS, pick the packet having the smallest virtual finish time

  22. WF2Q : Scheduling Example

  23. Fairness of WF2Q • Cannot fall behind GPS by one packet, however, can not fall ahead GPS by one packet • This means

  24. Conclusion • WFQ provides fairness and end-to-end delay bound, but has a heavy implementation complexity • SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q are easy to implement • Issues • Delay & bandwidth requirement is coupled

More Related