Evaluation of loadsharing algorithms for heterogeneous distributed systems

The performance of loadsharing algorithms for heterogeneous distributed systems is investigated by simulation. The systems considered are networks of workstations (nodes) which differ in processing power. Two parameters are proposed for characterising system heterogeneity, namely the variance and skew of the distribution of processing power among the network nodes. A variety of networks are investigated, with the same number of nodes and total processing power, but with the processing power distributed differently among the nodes. Two loadsharing algorithms are evaluated, at overall system loadings of 50% and 90%, using job response time as the performance metric. Comparison is made with the ideal situation of ‘perfect sharing’, where it is assumed that the communication delays are zero and that complete knowledge is available about job lengths and the loading at the different nodes, so that an arriving job can be sent to the node where it will be completed in the shortest time. The algorithms studied are based on those already in use for homogeneous networks, but were adapted to take account of system heterogeneity. Both algorithms take into account the differences in the processing powers of the nodes in their location policies, but differ in the extent to which they ‘discriminate’ against the slower nodes. It is seen that the relative performance of the two is strongly influenced by the system utilisation and the distribution of processing power among the nodes.

Examining the effect of exit separation on aircraft evacuation performance during 90-second certification trials using evacuation modelling techniques

This paper examines the influence of exit separation, exit availability and seating configuration on aircraft evacuation efficiency and evacuation time. The purpose of this analysis is to explore how these parameters influence the 60-foot exit separation requirement found in aircraft certification rules. The analysis makes use of the airEXODUS evacuation model and is based on a typical wide-body aircraft cabin section involving two pairs of Type-A exits located at either end of the section with a maximum permissible loading of 220 passengers located between the exits. The analysis reveals that there is a complex relationship between exit separation and evacuation efficiency. A main finding of this work is that for the cabin section examined, with a maximum passenger load of 220 and under certification conditions, exit separations up to 170ft will result in approximately constant total evacuation times and average personal evacuation times. This practical exit separation threshold is decreased to 114ft if another combination of exits is selected. While other factors must also be considered when determining maximum allowable exit separations, these results suggest it is not possible to mandate a maximum exit separation without taking into consideration exit type, exit availability and aircraft configuration.

Public-public partnerships (PUPs) in water

Water operators need to be efficient, accountable, honest public institutions providing a universal service. Many water services however lack the institutional strength, the human resources, the technical expertise and equipment, or the financial or managerial capacity to provide these services. They need support to develop these capacities. The vast majority of water operators in the world are in the public sector – 90% of all major cities are served by such bodies. This means that the largest pool of experience and expertise, and the great majority of examples of good practice and sound institutions, are to be found in existing public sector water operators. Because they are public sector, however, they do not have any natural commercial incentive to provide international support. Their incentive stems from solidarity, not profit. Since 1990, however, the policies of donors and development banks have focussed on the private companies and their incentives. The vast resources of the public sector have been overlooked, even blocked by pro-private policies. Out of sight of these global policy-makers, however, a growing number of public sector water companies have been engaged, in a great variety of ways, in helping others develop the capacity to be effective and accountable public services. These supportive arrangements are now called 'public-public partnerships' (PUPs). A public-public partnership (PUP) is simply a collaboration between two or more public authorities or organisations, based on solidarity, to improve the capacity and effectiveness of one partner in providing public water or sanitation services. They have been described as: “a peer relationship forged around common values and objectives, which exclude profit-seeking”.1 Neither partner expects a commercial profit, directly or indirectly. This makes PUPs very different from the public–private partnerships (PPPs) which have been promoted by the international financial institutions (IFIs) like the World Bank. The problems of PPPs have been examined in a number of reports. A great advantage of PUPs is that they avoid the risks of such partnerships: transaction costs, contract failure, renegotiation, the complexities of regulation, commercial opportunism, monopoly pricing, commercial secrecy, currency risk, and lack of public legitimacy.2 PUPs are not merely an abstract concept. The list in the annexe to this paper includes over 130 PUPs in around 70 countries. This means that far more countries have hosted PUPs than host PPPs in water – according to a report from PPIAF in December 2008, there are only 44 countries with private participation in water. These PUPs cover a period of over 20 years, and been used in all regions of the world. The earliest date to the 1980s, when the Yokohama Waterworks Bureau first started partnerships to help train staff in other Asian countries. Many of the PUP projects have been initiated in the last few years, a result of the growing recognition of PUPs as a tool for achieving improvements in public water management. This paper attempts to provide an overview of the typical objectives of PUPs; the different forms of PUPs and partners involved; a series of case studies of actual PUPs; and an examination of the recent WOPs initiative. It then offers recommendations for future development of PUPs.