Comparison of Flow Scheduling Policies for Mix of Regular and Deadline Traffic in Datacenter Environments

TL;DR

This paper compares various flow scheduling policies in datacenter environments with mixed regular and deadline traffic, analyzing their performance under different traffic ratios, flow size distributions, and load conditions.

Contribution

It evaluates the effectiveness of deadline-aware and deadline-agnostic scheduling policies in mixed traffic scenarios, providing insights into their performance across different conditions.

Findings

SRPT outperforms FCFS in average completion times and deadline miss rate.

Deadline-aware schemes' performance varies significantly with deadline traffic fraction.

Heavy-tailed flows favor SRPT in most metrics except tail times.

Abstract

Datacenters are the main infrastructure on top of which cloud computing services are offered. Such infrastructure may be shared by a large number of tenants and applications generating a spectrum of datacenter traffic. Delay sensitive applications and applications with specific Service Level Agreements (SLAs), generate deadline constrained flows, while other applications initiate flows that are desired to be delivered as early as possible. As a result, datacenter traffic is a mix of two types of flows: deadline and regular. There are several scheduling policies for either traffic type with focus on minimizing completion times or deadline miss rate. In this report, we apply several scheduling policies to mix traffic scenario while varying the ratio of regular to deadline traffic. We consider FCFS (First Come First Serve), SRPT (Shortest Remaining Processing Time) and Fair Sharing as deadline agnostic approaches and a combination of Earliest Deadline First (EDF) with either FCFS or SRPT as deadline-aware schemes. In addition, for the latter, we consider both cases of prioritizing deadline traffic (Deadline First) and prioritizing regular traffic (Deadline Last). We study both light-tailed and heavy-tailed flow size distributions and measure mean, median and tail flow completion times (FCT) for regular flows along with Deadline Miss Rate (DMR) and average lateness for deadline flows. We also consider two operation regimes of lightly-loaded (low utilization) and heavily-loaded (high utilization). We find that performance of deadline-aware schemes is highly dependent on fraction of deadline traffic. With light-tailed flow sizes, we find that FCFS performs better in terms of tail times and average lateness while SRPT performs better in average times and deadline miss rate. For heavy-tailed flow sizes, except for tail times, SRPT performs better in all other metrics.