Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison
Identifieur interne : 000801 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000800; suivant : 000802Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison
Auteurs : B. Gaujal ; N. Navet ; J. MiggeSource :
- Real-Time Systems [ 0922-6443 ] ; 2003.
Descripteurs français
- Pascal (Inist)
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
In this paper, two well-known scheduling policies for real-time systems, namely background scheduling (BS) and dual-priority (DP) are compared in terms of response times for soft real-time traffic (SRT). It is proved in the preemptive as well as in the non-preemptive case that, when the SRT traffic is FIFO, the DP policy always outperforms BS for all instances of SRT tasks. When the SRT traffic is not FIFO but if all tasks are of equal size then, in the non-preemptive case, the average response times is shown to be always better under DP than under BS. As a complementary result, some non-FIFO examples where BS behaves better than DP for some SRT tasks but also on the average of the SRT response times, are given. The proofs are based on a trajectorial method that may be used for comparing other scheduling policies.
Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)
Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.
| pA |
|
|---|
Format Inist (serveur)
| NO : | PASCAL 03-0241437 EI |
|---|---|
| ET : | Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison |
| AU : | GAUJAL (B.); NAVET (N.); MIGGE (J.) |
| AF : | LORIA-INPL ENSEM-2/54516 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy/France (1 aut.) |
| DT : | Publication en série; Niveau analytique |
| SO : | Real-Time Systems; ISSN 0922-6443; Coden RESYE9; Pays-Bas; Da. 2003; Vol. 25; No. 1; Pp. 39-66; Bibl. 31 Refs. |
| LA : | Anglais |
| EA : | In this paper, two well-known scheduling policies for real-time systems, namely background scheduling (BS) and dual-priority (DP) are compared in terms of response times for soft real-time traffic (SRT). It is proved in the preemptive as well as in the non-preemptive case that, when the SRT traffic is FIFO, the DP policy always outperforms BS for all instances of SRT tasks. When the SRT traffic is not FIFO but if all tasks are of equal size then, in the non-preemptive case, the average response times is shown to be always better under DP than under BS. As a complementary result, some non-FIFO examples where BS behaves better than DP for some SRT tasks but also on the average of the SRT response times, are given. The proofs are based on a trajectorial method that may be used for comparing other scheduling policies. |
| CC : | 001D03J07; 001D02B12 |
| FD : | Application; Ordonnancement; Temps réponse; Algorithme; Réseau local; Système temps réel; Théorie |
| ED : | Dual priority scheduling; Background scheduling; Soft real time traffic; Application; Scheduling; Response time (computer systems); Algorithms; Local area networks; Real time systems; Theory |
| SD : | Aplicación |
| LO : | INIST-XXXX |
| ID : | 03-0241437 |
Links to Exploration step
Pascal:03-0241437Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison</title><author><name sortKey="Gaujal, B" sort="Gaujal, B" uniqKey="Gaujal B" first="B." last="Gaujal">B. Gaujal</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>LORIA-INPL ENSEM-2</s1><s2>54516 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy</s2><s3>FRA</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Navet, N" sort="Navet, N" uniqKey="Navet N" first="N." last="Navet">N. Navet</name></author><author><name sortKey="Migge, J" sort="Migge, J" uniqKey="Migge J" first="J." last="Migge">J. Migge</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno><idno type="inist">03-0241437</idno><date when="2003">2003</date><idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 03-0241437 EI</idno><idno type="RBID">Pascal:03-0241437</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000801</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison</title><author><name sortKey="Gaujal, B" sort="Gaujal, B" uniqKey="Gaujal B" first="B." last="Gaujal">B. Gaujal</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>LORIA-INPL ENSEM-2</s1><s2>54516 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy</s2><s3>FRA</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Navet, N" sort="Navet, N" uniqKey="Navet N" first="N." last="Navet">N. Navet</name></author><author><name sortKey="Migge, J" sort="Migge, J" uniqKey="Migge J" first="J." last="Migge">J. Migge</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j" type="main">Real-Time Systems</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">Real Time Syst</title><idno type="ISSN">0922-6443</idno><imprint><date when="2003">2003</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Real-Time Systems</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">Real Time Syst</title><idno type="ISSN">0922-6443</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Algorithms</term><term>Application</term><term>Background scheduling</term><term>Dual priority scheduling</term><term>Local area networks</term><term>Real time systems</term><term>Response time (computer systems)</term><term>Scheduling</term><term>Soft real time traffic</term><term>Theory</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Application</term><term>Ordonnancement</term><term>Temps réponse</term><term>Algorithme</term><term>Réseau local</term><term>Système temps réel</term><term>Théorie</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">In this paper, two well-known scheduling policies for real-time systems, namely background scheduling (BS) and dual-priority (DP) are compared in terms of response times for soft real-time traffic (SRT). It is proved in the preemptive as well as in the non-preemptive case that, when the SRT traffic is FIFO, the DP policy always outperforms BS for all instances of SRT tasks. When the SRT traffic is not FIFO but if all tasks are of equal size then, in the non-preemptive case, the average response times is shown to be always better under DP than under BS. As a complementary result, some non-FIFO examples where BS behaves better than DP for some SRT tasks but also on the average of the SRT response times, are given. The proofs are based on a trajectorial method that may be used for comparing other scheduling policies.</div></front></TEI><inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0922-6443</s0></fA01><fA02 i1="01"><s0>RESYE9</s0></fA02><fA03 i2="1"><s0>Real Time Syst</s0></fA03><fA05><s2>25</s2></fA05><fA06><s2>1</s2></fA06><fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison</s1></fA08><fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>GAUJAL (B.)</s1></fA11><fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>NAVET (N.)</s1></fA11><fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>MIGGE (J.)</s1></fA11><fA14 i1="01"><s1>LORIA-INPL ENSEM-2</s1><s2>54516 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy</s2><s3>FRA</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ></fA14><fA20><s1>39-66</s1></fA20><fA21><s1>2003</s1></fA21><fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0></fA23><fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1><s2>XXXX</s2></fA43><fA44><s0>A100</s0></fA44><fA45><s0>31 Refs.</s0></fA45><fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>03-0241437</s0></fA47><fA60><s1>P</s1></fA60><fA61><s0>A</s0></fA61><fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Real-Time Systems</s0></fA64><fA66 i1="01"><s0>NLD</s0></fA66><fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>In this paper, two well-known scheduling policies for real-time systems, namely background scheduling (BS) and dual-priority (DP) are compared in terms of response times for soft real-time traffic (SRT). It is proved in the preemptive as well as in the non-preemptive case that, when the SRT traffic is FIFO, the DP policy always outperforms BS for all instances of SRT tasks. When the SRT traffic is not FIFO but if all tasks are of equal size then, in the non-preemptive case, the average response times is shown to be always better under DP than under BS. As a complementary result, some non-FIFO examples where BS behaves better than DP for some SRT tasks but also on the average of the SRT response times, are given. The proofs are based on a trajectorial method that may be used for comparing other scheduling policies.</s0></fC01><fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>001D03J07</s0></fC02><fC02 i1="02" i2="X"><s0>001D02B12</s0></fC02><fC03 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Dual priority scheduling</s0><s4>INC</s4></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Background scheduling</s0><s4>INC</s4></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Soft real time traffic</s0><s4>INC</s4></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Application</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Application</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Aplicación</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Ordonnancement</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Scheduling</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Temps réponse</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Response time (computer systems)</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Algorithme</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Algorithms</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="08" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Réseau local</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="08" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Local area networks</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="09" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Système temps réel</s0><s3>P</s3></fC03><fC03 i1="09" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Real time systems</s0><s3>P</s3></fC03><fC03 i1="10" i2="1" l="FRE"><s0>Théorie</s0></fC03><fC03 i1="10" i2="1" l="ENG"><s0>Theory</s0></fC03><fN21><s1>153</s1></fN21></pA></standard><server><NO>PASCAL 03-0241437 EI</NO><ET>Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison</ET><AU>GAUJAL (B.); NAVET (N.); MIGGE (J.)</AU><AF>LORIA-INPL ENSEM-2/54516 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy/France (1 aut.)</AF><DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT><SO>Real-Time Systems; ISSN 0922-6443; Coden RESYE9; Pays-Bas; Da. 2003; Vol. 25; No. 1; Pp. 39-66; Bibl. 31 Refs.</SO><LA>Anglais</LA><EA>In this paper, two well-known scheduling policies for real-time systems, namely background scheduling (BS) and dual-priority (DP) are compared in terms of response times for soft real-time traffic (SRT). It is proved in the preemptive as well as in the non-preemptive case that, when the SRT traffic is FIFO, the DP policy always outperforms BS for all instances of SRT tasks. When the SRT traffic is not FIFO but if all tasks are of equal size then, in the non-preemptive case, the average response times is shown to be always better under DP than under BS. As a complementary result, some non-FIFO examples where BS behaves better than DP for some SRT tasks but also on the average of the SRT response times, are given. The proofs are based on a trajectorial method that may be used for comparing other scheduling policies.</EA><CC>001D03J07; 001D02B12</CC><FD>Application; Ordonnancement; Temps réponse; Algorithme; Réseau local; Système temps réel; Théorie</FD><ED>Dual priority scheduling; Background scheduling; Soft real time traffic; Application; Scheduling; Response time (computer systems); Algorithms; Local area networks; Real time systems; Theory</ED><SD>Aplicación</SD><LO>INIST-XXXX</LO><ID>03-0241437</ID></server></inist></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Lorraine/explor/InforLorV4/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000801 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000801 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Lorraine
|area= InforLorV4
|flux= PascalFrancis
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= Pascal:03-0241437
|texte= Dual-priority versus background scheduling: A path-wise comparison
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |