Efficiency improvements for solving layered queueing networks

Authors:
Greg Franks;Lianhua Li
Affiliations:
Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada;Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Venue:
ICPE '12 Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering
Year:
2012

Citing 8
Cited 0

The Stochastic Rendezvous Network Model for Performance of Synchronous Client-Server-like Distributed Software

IEEE Transactions on Computers
Linearizer: a heuristic algorithm for queueing network models of computing systems

Communications of the ACM
Analyzing queueing networks with simultaneous resource possession

Communications of the ACM
The Method of Layers

IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Some Extensions to Multiclass Queueing Network Analysis

Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Modelling and Performance Evaluation of Computer Systems: Performance of Computer Systems
Interaction tree algorithms to extract effective architecture and layered performance models from traces

Journal of Systems and Software
Enhanced Modeling and Solution of Layered Queueing Networks

IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A performance experiment system supporting fast mapping of system issues

Proceedings of the Fourth International ICST Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Layered Queueing Networks (LQN) have been used successfully by numerous researchers to solve performance models of multi-tier client server systems. A common approach for solving a LQN is to split the model up into a set of submodels, then employ approximate mean value analysis (AMVA) on each of these submodels in an interactive fashion and using the results from the solution of one submodel as inputs to the others. This paper addresses the performance of the layered queueing network solver, LQNS, in terms of submodel construction and in terms of changes to Bard-Schweitzer and Linearizer AMVA, in order to improve performance. In some of the models described in this paper, there is a difference in four orders of magnitude between the fastest and slowest approaches.