Abstract
Fairness is an important aspect in queuing systems. Several fairness measures have been proposed in queuing systems in general and parallel job scheduling in particular. Generally, a scheduler is considered unfair if some jobs are discriminated whereas others are favored. Some of the metrics used to measure fairness for parallel job schedulers can imply unfairness where there is no discrimination (and vice versa). This makes them inappropriate. In this paper, we show how the existing approach misrepresents fairness in practice. We then propose a new approach for measuring fairness for parallel job schedulers. Our approach is based on two principles: (i) as jobs have different resource requirements and find different queue/system states, they need not have the same performance for the scheduler to be fair and (ii) to compare two schedulers for fairness, we make comparisons of how the schedulers favor/discriminate individual jobs. We use performance and discrimination trends to validate our approach. We observe that our approach can deduce discrimination more accurately. This is true even in cases where the most discriminated jobs are not the worst performing jobs. Copyright Β© 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.