A possible problem with that is: suppose project A has a long job in EDF, project B has a runnable job, and project C doesn't have a job. Then A's STD would be zero, and B's STD would go to MAX_STD (1 day). If A's job finishes and C gets a job, it wouldn't run for a day; in effect, C would be penalized for A's deadline crisis.
An alternative: add the normalizing offset to non-runnable projects. In the above case, C's STD would go to MAX_STD, and it would start off on equal footing with B, which is the correct behavior. -- David [email protected] wrote: > I believe that the system would work better if the minimum short term debt > were 0 rather than the mean short term debt being 0. Typically what > happens is that the task that has just completed has a negative STD. If > this is the last one for the project, many of the tasks with higher STDs > are shifted to have a negative STD. If the project then is allowed to > download a task immediately (and this does often happen) the project will > then have a STD of 0, effectively bypassing other projects that used to > have a higher STD. > > If the minimum STD were kept at 0, this would not happen. When the lowest > value STD project was removed from the STD, the next lowest value STD > project would then have a value of 0. This starts all new tasks from > projects at the bottom, and they may have to wait for a while for their > turn. However, it does mean that projects that have had work on the system > will eventually have the STD be high enough to actually run. > > jm7 > _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
