An Experimental Study of New and Known Online Packet Buffering Algorithms

Albers, Susanne; Jacobs, Tobias

doi:10.1007/s00453-008-9230-y

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Azar et al [5] gave a lower bound of 1.366 − Θ(1/m) for a deterministic algorithm for any B. Albers et al [3] showed that the competitive ratio of any greedy algorithms is at least 2 − 1/B− Θ(m −1/(2B−2) ) for any B and large enough m. They also gave a 17/9( 1.89)-competitive deterministic algorithm for B ≥ 2, and it is optimal in the case B = 2. Albers and Jacobs [2] performed an experimental study on several online algorithms for the multi queue model for the first time.…”

Section: Related Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(iv) Before the first event of σ 3 , add T (T ) arrival events where arriving packets are destined for Q (1) , and the same number of arrival events where arriving packets are destined for Q (2) . Call these 2T (T) packets I-packets.…”

Section: Evaluating Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GR (t−), transmit a packet from Q (2) . In what follows, we show the relation between the number of packets which S G transmits from S 1 for σ and the number of packets which GR transmits for σ in the new model.…”

Section: Lemma 312: F Optmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Tight Upper Bound on Online Buffer Management for Multi-Queue Switches with Bicodal Buffers

Kobayashi

Miyazaki

Okabe

2008

IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe online buffer management problem formulates the problem of queuing policies of network switches supporting QoS (Quality of Service) guarantee. In this paper, we consider one of the most standard models, called multi-queue switches model. In this model, Albers et al. gave a lower bound e e−1 , and Azar et al. gave an upper bound e e−1 on the competitive ratio when m, the number of input ports, is large. They are tight, but there still remains a gap for small m. In this paper, we consider the case where m = 2, namely, a switch is equipped with two ports, which is called a bicordal buffer model. We propose an online algorithm called Segmental Greedy Algorithm (S G) and show that its competitive ratio is at most

show abstract

Section: Related Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evaluating Smentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Tight Upper Bound on Online Buffer Management for Multi-Queue Switches with Bicodal Buffers

Kobayashi

Miyazaki

Okabe

2008

IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the algorithms described above were evaluated experimentally in the paper of Albers and Jacobs [2].…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Optimal Lower Bound for Buffer Management in Multi-Queue Switches

Bieńkowski

2012

Algorithmica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the online packet buffering problem (also known as the unweighted FIFO variant of buffer management), we focus on a single network packet switching device with several input ports and one output port. This device forwards unit-size, unit-value packets from input ports to the output port. Buffers attached to input ports may accumulate incoming packets for later transmission; if they cannot accommodate all incoming packets, their excess is lost. A packet buffering algorithm has to choose from which buffers to transmit packets in order to minimize the number of lost packets and thus maximize the throughput.We present a tight lower bound of e/(e − 1) ≈ 1.582 on the competitive ratio of the throughput maximization, which holds even for fractional or randomized algorithms. This improves the previously best known lower bound of 1.4659 and matches the performance of the algorithm RANDOM SCHEDULE. Our result contradicts the claimed performance of the algorithm RANDOM PERMUTATION; we point out a flaw in its original analysis.

show abstract

“…Albers and Jacobs undertake an experimental evaluation of many of the following policies [AJ07,AJ10]. We note that with unit values, there is never a reason to preempt one packet in favor of another.…”

Section: Multiple Input Queuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of buffer management policies for packet switches

Goldwasser

2010

SIGACT News

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, there has been great interest in the study of buffer management policies in the context of packet transmission for network switches. In a typical model, a switch receives packets on one or more input ports, with each packet having a designated output port through which it should be transmitted. An online policy must consider bandwidth limits on the rate of transmission, memory constraints impacting the buffering of packets within a switch, and variations in packet properties used to differentiate quality of service. With so many constraints, a switch may not be able to deliver all packets, in which case some will be dropped.In the online algorithms community, researchers have used competitive analysis to evaluate the quality of an online policy in maximizing the value of those packets it is able to transmit. In this article, we provide a detailed survey of the field, describing various models of the problem that have been studied, and summarizing the known results.

show abstract

An Experimental Study of New and Known Online Packet Buffering Algorithms

Cited by 15 publications

References 31 publications

A Tight Upper Bound on Online Buffer Management for Multi-Queue Switches with Bicodal Buffers

A Tight Upper Bound on Online Buffer Management for Multi-Queue Switches with Bicodal Buffers

An Optimal Lower Bound for Buffer Management in Multi-Queue Switches

A survey of buffer management policies for packet switches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About