Tight Bounds for Dynamic Storage Allocation
SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics
Approximation algorithms for bin packing: a survey
Approximation algorithms for NP-hard problems
Bin packing with discrete item sizes, part II: tight bounds on first fit
Random Structures & Algorithms - Special issue: average-case analysis of algorithms
The memory fragmentation problem: solved?
Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on Memory management
On the sum-of-squares algorithm for bin packing
STOC '00 Proceedings of the thirty-second annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics
Hoard: a scalable memory allocator for multithreaded applications
ACM SIGPLAN Notices
Reconsidering custom memory allocation
OOPSLA '02 Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications
Linear waste of best fit bin packing on skewed distributions
Random Structures & Algorithms - Probabilistic methods in combinatorial optimization
Dynamic Storage Allocation: A Survey and Critical Review
IWMM '95 Proceedings of the International Workshop on Memory Management
A Self Organizing Bin Packing Heuristic
ALENEX '99 Selected papers from the International Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experimentation
Non-compacting memory allocation and real-time garbage collection
Non-compacting memory allocation and real-time garbage collection
On the Sum-of-Squares algorithm for bin packing
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Fundamentals of Data Structures in C++
Fundamentals of Data Structures in C++
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The sum-of-squares algorithm (SS) was introduced by Csirik, Johnson, Kenyon, Shor, and Weber for online bin packing of integral-sized items into integral-sized bins. First, we show the results of experiments from two new variants of the SS algorithm. The first variant, which runs in time O(n&sqrt;BlogB), appears to have almost identical expected waste as the sum-of-squares algorithm on all the distributions mentioned in the original papers on this topic. The other variant, which runs in O(nlogB) time, performs well on most, but not on all of those distributions. We also apply SS to the online memory-allocation problem. Our experimental comparisons between SS and Best Fit indicate that neither algorithm is consistently better than the other. If the amount of randomness in item sizes is low, SS appears to have lower waste than Best Fit, whereas, if the amount of randomness is high Best Fit appears to have lower waste than SS. Our experiments suggest that in both real and synthetic traces, SS does not seem to have an asymptotic advantage over Best Fit, in contrast with the bin-packing problem.