Multilevel Queue Scheduling (MQS) with Round Robin
I’m trying to use MQS to create a Gantt chart of 5 processes (P1-P5) as well as their waiting, response, and turnaround times (and averages of those metrics) within a CPU task schedule. Here’s the basic table of arrival times and bursts:
Could we set priorities only relative to each other instead of fixed numbers?
AFAIK the lowest priority has the highest number in scheduling and in my system all priorities must be different. But isn’t other policies thinkable? For instance, how about a policy where priorities are not numbers but say that a task’s priority would be defined only in term of another task’s priority, and that other task would be the closest in priority to the task whose priority we are setting. Then we would never use actual numbers for priorities, but we would keep a data structure sorting the tasks in priorities and when a task comes as new or is getting a different priority assigned, then this structure is rebalanced. Would this priority mechanism be feasible or do you not agree that it’s a working idea?
Could we set priorities only relative to each other instead of fixed numbers?
AFAIK the lowest priority has the highest number in scheduling and in my system all priorities must be different. But isn’t other policies thinkable? For instance, how about a policy where priorities are not numbers but say that a task’s priority would be defined only in term of another task’s priority, and that other task would be the closest in priority to the task whose priority we are setting. Then we would never use actual numbers for priorities, but we would keep a data structure sorting the tasks in priorities and when a task comes as new or is getting a different priority assigned, then this structure is rebalanced. Would this priority mechanism be feasible or do you not agree that it’s a working idea?
Could we set priorities only relative to each other instead of fixed numbers?
AFAIK the lowest priority has the highest number in scheduling and in my system all priorities must be different. But isn’t other policies thinkable? For instance, how about a policy where priorities are not numbers but say that a task’s priority would be defined only in term of another task’s priority, and that other task would be the closest in priority to the task whose priority we are setting. Then we would never use actual numbers for priorities, but we would keep a data structure sorting the tasks in priorities and when a task comes as new or is getting a different priority assigned, then this structure is rebalanced. Would this priority mechanism be feasible or do you not agree that it’s a working idea?
Cache aware job placement algorithm
I am looking for an advise on selecting or building a job placement algorithm.
Algorithm to find times when resources are available
I’m writing a semi-automatic scheduling application. Given some existing bookings and some resource requirements, it needs to find the times at which a new event can be scheduled. A human user will then evaluate the results and choose one of the options. It does not need to optimise a timetable for multiple events and hence it is not the usual NP-Hard timetabling problem.
How long do you spend on analysis? Is this analysis paralysis? [duplicate]
This question already has answers here: What can I do to get better at estimating how long projects are going to take? [duplicate] (36 answers) Closed 10 years ago. I am not very good at estimating how long a piece of work will take to complete. I am guilty of putting my finger in the […]
Identify algorithm for my resource allocation needs
I’m trying to automate a task and I lack the right vocabulary to look up the correct algorithm. It really feels like a common problem that has likely been solved many times before.
Identify algorithm for my resource allocation needs
I’m trying to automate a task and I lack the right vocabulary to look up the correct algorithm. It really feels like a common problem that has likely been solved many times before.