An Admission Control Paradigm for Real-time Databases

We propose and evaluate an admission control paradigm for RTDBS, in which a transaction is submitted to the system as a pair of processes: a primary task, and a recovery block. The execution requirements of the primary task are not known a priori, whereas those of the recovery block are known a priori. Upon the submission of a transaction, an Admission Control Mechanism is employed to decide whether to admit or reject that transaction. Once admitted, a transaction is guaranteed to finish executing before its deadline. A transaction is considered to have finished executing if exactly one of two things occur: Either its primary task is completed (successful commitment), or its recovery block is completed (safe termination). Committed transactions bring a profit to the system, whereas a terminated transaction brings no profit. The goal of the admission control and scheduling protocols (e.g., concurrency control, I/O scheduling, memory management) employed in the system is to maximize system profit. We describe a number of admission control strategies and contrast (through simulations) their relative performance.

Concurrency Admission Control Management in ACCORD

We propose and evaluate admission control mechanisms for ACCORD, an Admission Control and Capacity Overload management Real-time Database framework-an architecture and a transaction model-for hard deadline RTDB systems. The system architecture consists of admission control and scheduling components which provide early notification of failure to submitted transactions that are deemed not valuable or incapable of completing on time. In particular, our Concurrency Admission Control Manager (CACM) ensures that transactions which are admitted do not overburden the system by requiring a level of concurrency that is not sustainable. The transaction model consists of two components: a primary task and a compensating task. The execution requirements of the primary task are not known a priori, whereas those of the compensating task are known a priori. Upon the submission of a transaction, the Admission Control Mechanisms are employed to decide whether to admit or reject that transaction. Once admitted, a transaction is guaranteed to finish executing before its deadline. A transaction is considered to have finished executing if exactly one of two things occur: Either its primary task is completed (successful commitment), or its compensating task is completed (safe termination). Committed transactions bring a profit to the system, whereas a terminated transaction brings no profit. The goal of the admission control and scheduling protocols (e.g., concurrency control, I/O scheduling, memory management) employed in the system is to maximize system profit. In that respect, we describe a number of concurrency admission control strategies and contrast (through simulations) their relative performance.

Evaluation of a Load Profiling Approach to Routing Guaranteed Bandwidth Flows

To support the diverse Quality of Service (QoS) requirements of real-time (e.g. audio/video) applications in integrated services networks, several routing algorithms that allow for the reservation of the needed bandwidth over a Virtual Circuit (VC) established on one of several candidate routes have been proposed. Traditionally, such routing is done using the least-loaded concept, and thus results in balancing the load across the set of candidate routes. In a recent study, we have established the inadequacy of this load balancing practice and proposed the use of load profiling as an alternative. Load profiling techniques allow the distribution of "available" bandwidth across a set of candidate routes to match the characteristics of incoming VC QoS requests. In this paper we thoroughly characterize the performance of VC routing using load profiling and contrast it to routing using load balancing and load packing. We do so both analytically and via extensive simulations of multi-class traffic routing in Virtual Path (VP) based networks. Our findings confirm that for routing guaranteed bandwidth flows in VP networks, load balancing is not desirable as it results in VP bandwidth fragmentation, which adversely affects the likelihood of accepting new VC requests. This fragmentation is more pronounced when the granularity of VC requests is large. Typically, this occurs when a common VC is established to carry the aggregate traffic flow of many high-bandwidth real-time sources. For VP-based networks, our simulation results show that our load-profiling VC routing scheme performs better or as well as the traditional load-balancing VC routing in terms of revenue under both skewed and uniform workloads. Furthermore, load-profiling routing improves routing fairness by proactively increasing the chances of admitting high-bandwidth connections.

Slack Stealing Job Admission Control Scheduling

In this paper, we present Slack Stealing Job Admission Control (SSJAC)---a methodology for scheduling periodic firm-deadline tasks with variable resource requirements, subject to controllable Quality of Service (QoS) constraints. In a system that uses Rate Monotonic Scheduling, SSJAC augments the slack stealing algorithm of Thuel et al with an admission control policy to manage the variability in the resource requirements of the periodic tasks. This enables SSJAC to take advantage of the 31\% of utilization that RMS cannot use, as well as any utilization unclaimed by jobs that are not admitted into the system. Using SSJAC, each task in the system is assigned a resource utilization threshold that guarantees the minimal acceptable QoS for that task (expressed as an upper bound on the rate of missed deadlines). Job admission control is used to ensure that (1) only those jobs that will complete by their deadlines are admitted, and (2) tasks do not interfere with each other, thus a job can only monopolize the slack in the system, but not the time guaranteed to jobs of other tasks. We have evaluated SSJAC against RMS and Statistical RMS (SRMS). Ignoring overhead issues, SSJAC consistently provides better performance than RMS in overload, and, in certain conditions, better performance than SRMS. In addition, to evaluate optimality of SSJAC in an absolute sense, we have characterized the performance of SSJAC by comparing it to an inefficient, yet optimal scheduler for task sets with harmonic periods.