IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v189y2008i2p375-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mean sojourn times for phase-type discriminatory processor sharing systems

Author

Listed:
  • Haviv, Moshe
  • van der Wal, Jan

Abstract

In a discriminatory processor sharing (DPS) queueing model, each job (or customer) belongs to one out of finitely many classes. The arrival processes are Poisson. Classes differ with respect to arrival rates and service time distributions. Moreover, classes have different priority levels. All jobs present are served simultaneously but the fraction of the server's capacity allocated to each one of them is proportional to their class priority parameter (while the total capacity is of course fixed). For the case of exponential service requirements, we find the mean sojourn times of various job classes, conditioning on the system's state, namely how many of each class are present. Next we derive the well-known system of linear equations solved by the unconditional values. We then switch to the much weaker assumption of phase-type service requirements, different across classes, where additionally the priority parameters may depend both on class and phase (and not only on class as assumed in existing papers). We determine mean sojourn times for a job belonging to any class, firstly conditional on the numbers of jobs from all classes present (which are shown to be affine functions) and secondly, unconditionally (as solutions of a system of linear equations).

Suggested Citation

  • Haviv, Moshe & van der Wal, Jan, 2008. "Mean sojourn times for phase-type discriminatory processor sharing systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(2), pages 375-386, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:189:y:2008:i:2:p:375-386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(07)00526-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kiran M. Rege & Bhaskar Sengupta, 1996. "Queue-Length Distribution for the Discriminatory Processor-Sharing Queue," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 653-657, August.
    2. Alan Cobham, 1954. "Priority Assignment in Waiting Line Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 70-76, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Legros, Benjamin & Jouini, Oualid, 2019. "On the scheduling of operations in a chat contact center," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 303-316.
    2. Pala, Ali & Zhuang, Jun, 2018. "Security screening queues with impatient applicants: A new model with a case study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(3), pages 919-930.
    3. I. M. Verloop & U. Ayesta & R. Núñez-Queija, 2011. "Heavy-Traffic Analysis of a Multiple-Phase Network with Discriminatory Processor Sharing," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 648-660, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Kittsteiner & Benny Moldovanu, 2005. "Priority Auctions and Queue Disciplines That Depend on Processing Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 236-248, February.
    2. Mor Harchol-Balter & Takayuki Osogami & Alan Scheller-Wolf & Adam Wierman, 2005. "Multi-Server Queueing Systems with Multiple Priority Classes," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 331-360, December.
    3. Tsiligianni, Christiana & Tsiligiannis, Aristeides & Tsiliyannis, Christos, 2023. "A stochastic inventory model of COVID-19 and robust, real-time identification of carriers at large and infection rate via asymptotic laws," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(1), pages 42-56.
    4. G. M. Koole & B. F. Nielsen & T. B. Nielsen, 2012. "First in Line Waiting Times as a Tool for Analysing Queueing Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1258-1266, October.
    5. Nilay Tan{i}k Argon & Serhan Ziya, 2009. "Priority Assignment Under Imperfect Information on Customer Type Identities," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 674-693, June.
    6. Jerim Kim & Bara Kim & Hsing Luh, 2019. "Analysis of a Markovian feedback queue with multi-class customers and its application to the weighted round-robin queue," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 277(2), pages 137-159, June.
    7. Huiyin Ouyang & Nilay Taník Argon & Serhan Ziya, 2022. "Assigning Priorities (or Not) in Service Systems with Nonlinear Waiting Costs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1233-1255, February.
    8. Soroush Saghafian & Wallace J. Hopp & Mark P. Van Oyen & Jeffrey S. Desmond & Steven L. Kronick, 2014. "Complexity-Augmented Triage: A Tool for Improving Patient Safety and Operational Efficiency," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 329-345, July.
    9. Jori Selen & Brian Fralix, 2017. "Time-dependent analysis of an M / M / c preemptive priority system with two priority classes," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 379-415, December.
    10. Zaki, Ahmed S. & Cheng, Hsing Kenneth & Parker, Barnett R., 1997. "A Simulation Model for the Analysis and Management of An Emergency Service System," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 173-189, September.
    11. Divya Velayudhan Nair & Achyutha Krishnamoorthy & Agassi Melikov & Sevinj Aliyeva, 2021. "MMAP/(PH,PH)/1 Queue with Priority Loss through Feedback," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(15), pages 1-26, July.
    12. Andrei Sleptchenko & M. Eric Johnson, 2015. "Maintaining Secure and Reliable Distributed Control Systems," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 103-117, February.
    13. H. Thorsdottir & I. M. Verloop, 2016. "Markov-modulated M/G/1-type queue in heavy traffic and its application to time-sharing disciplines," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 83(1), pages 29-55, June.
    14. Hideaki Takagi, 2016. "Waiting time in the M/M/ $$ m $$ m LCFS nonpreemptive priority queue with impatient customers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(1), pages 257-289, December.
    15. Florian Simatos & Alain Simonian, 2020. "Mobility can drastically improve the heavy traffic performance from $$\frac{1}{1-\varrho }$$11-ϱ to $$\log (1/(1-\varrho ))$$log(1/(1-ϱ))," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 1-28, June.
    16. van Vianen, L.A. & Gabor, A.F. & van Ommeren, J.C.W., 2014. "A simple derivation of the waiting time distributions in a non-preemptive M/M/c queue with priorities," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2014-016-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    17. I. M. Verloop & U. Ayesta & R. Núñez-Queija, 2011. "Heavy-Traffic Analysis of a Multiple-Phase Network with Discriminatory Processor Sharing," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 648-660, June.
    18. Sanjiv Kapoor & Junghwan Shin, 2020. "Price of Anarchy in Networks with Heterogeneous Latency Functions," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(2), pages 755-773, May.
    19. Daniel Jaramillo-Ramirez & Manuel Perez, 2021. "Spectrum Demand Forecasting for IoT Services," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, September.
    20. Phan, Trang Hoai & Stachuletz, Rainer, 2022. "Bribery - Export Nexus under the Firm’s Growth Obstacles," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 132144, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:189:y:2008:i:2:p:375-386. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.