Buffer Overflow Management with Class Segregation

We consider a new model for buffer management of network switches with Quality of Service (QoS) requirements. A stream of packets, each attributed with a value representing its Class of Service (CoS), arrives over time at a network switch and demands a further transmission. The switch is equipped with multiple queues of limited capacities, where each queue stores packets of one value only. The objective is to maximize the total value of the transmitted packets (i.e., the weighted throughput). We analyze a natural greedy algorithm, GREEDY, which sends in each time step a packet with the greatest value. For general packet values $(v_1 < \cdots < v_m)$, we show that GREEDY is $(1+r)$-competitive, where $r = \max_{1\le i \le m-1} \{v_i/v_{i+1}\}$. Furthermore, we show a lower bound of $2 - v_m / \sum_{i=1}^m v_i$ on the competitiveness of any deterministic online algorithm. In the special case of two packet values (1 and $\alpha > 1$), GREEDY is shown to be optimal with a competitive ratio of $(\alpha + 2)/(\alpha + 1)$

A lazy approach to on-line bipartite matching

We present a new approach, called a lazy matching, to the problem of on-line matching on bipartite graphs. Imagine that one side of a graph is given and the vertices of the other side are arriving on-line. Originally, incoming vertex is either irrevocably matched to an another element or stays forever unmatched. A lazy algorithm is allowed to match a new vertex to a group of elements (possibly empty) and afterwords, forced against next vertices, may give up parts of the group. The restriction is that all the time each element is in at most one group. We present an optimal lazy algorithm (deterministic) and prove that its competitive ratio equals $1-\pi/\cosh(\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}\pi)\approx 0.588$. The lazy approach allows us to break the barrier of $1/2$, which is the best competitive ratio that can be guaranteed by any deterministic algorithm in the classical on-line matching

Deferred on-line bipartite matching

We present a new model for the problem of on-line matching on bipartite graphs. Suppose that one part of a graph is given, but the vertices of the other part are presented in an on-line fashion. In the classical version, each incoming vertex is either irrevocably matched to a vertex from the other part or stays unmatched forever. In our version, an algorithm is allowed to match the new vertex to a group of elements (possibly empty). Later on, the algorithm can decide to remove some vertices from the group and assign them to another (just presented) vertex, with the restriction that each element belongs to at most one group. We present an optimal (deterministic) algorithm for this problem and prove that its competitive ratio equals

Greedy Algorithms for Multi-Queue Buffer Management with Class Segregation

In this paper, we focus on a multi-queue buffer management in which packets of different values are segregated in different queues. Our model consists of m packets values and m queues. Recently, Al-Bawani and Souza (arXiv:1103.6049v2 [cs.DS] 30 Mar 2011) presented an online multi-queue buffer management algorithm Greedy and showed that it is 2-competitive for the general m-valued case, i.e., m packet values are 0 < v_{1} < v_{2} < ... < v_{m}, and (1+v_{1}/v_{2})-competitive for the two-valued case, i.e., two packet values are 0 < v_{1} < v_{2}. For the general m-valued case, let c_i = (v_{i} + \sum_{j=1}^{i-1} 2^{j-1} v_{i-j})/(v_{i+1} + \sum_{j=1}^{i-1}2^{j-1}v_{i-j}) for 1 \leq i \leq m-1, and let c_{m}^{*} = \max_{i} c_{i}. In this paper, we precisely analyze the competitive ratio of Greedy for the general m-valued case, and show that the algorithm Greedy is (1+c_{m}^{*})-competitive.Comment: 19 page

Breaking the Barrier Of 2 for the Competitiveness of Longest Queue Drop

We consider the problem of managing the buffer of a shared-memory switch that transmits packets of unit value. A shared-memory switch consists of an input port, a number of output ports, and a buffer with a specific capacity. In each time step, an arbitrary number of packets arrive at the input port, each packet designated for one output port. Each packet is added to the queue of the respective output port. If the total number of packets exceeds the capacity of the buffer, some packets have to be irrevocably rejected. At the end of each time step, each output port transmits a packet in its queue and the goal is to maximize the number of transmitted packets. The Longest Queue Drop (LQD) online algorithm accepts any arriving packet to the buffer. However, if this results in the buffer exceeding its memory capacity, then LQD drops a packet from the back of whichever queue is currently the longest, breaking ties arbitrarily. The LQD algorithm was first introduced in 1991, and is known to be 2-competitive since 2001. Although LQD remains the best known online algorithm for the problem and is of practical interest, determining its true competitiveness is a long-standing open problem. We show that LQD is 1.707-competitive, establishing the first (2-?) upper bound for the competitive ratio of LQD, for a constant ? > 0

Competitive Management of Non-preemptive Queues with Multiple Values

We consider the online problem of active queue management. In our model, the input is a sequence of packets with values v ∈ [1, α] that arrive to a queue that can hold up to B packets. Specifically, we consider a FIFO non-preemptive queue, where any packet that is accepted into the queue must be sent, and packets are sent by the order of arrival. The benefit of a scheduling policy, on a given input, is the sum of values of the scheduled packets. Our aim is to find an online policy that maximizes its benefit compared to the optimal offline solution. Previous work proved that no constant competitive ratio exists for this problem, showing a lower bound of ln(α)+1 for any online policy. An upper bound of e⌈ln(α) ⌉ was proved for a few online policies. In this paper we suggest and analyze a RED-like online policy with a competitive ratio that matches the lower bound up to an additive constant proving an upper bound of ln(α) + 2 + O(ln 2 (α)/B). For large values of α, we prove that no policy whose decisions are based only on the number of packets in the queue and the value of the arriving packet, has a competitive ratio lower than ln(α) + 2 − ɛ, for any constant ɛ&gt; 0. Submitted to the regular track. Nir Andelman is a full time student at Tel-Aviv University.