Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Hi.
Is there any progress on this?
Regards.
Original comment by marcos.p...@gmail.com
on 14 Jan 2013 at 10:28
Hi,
We believe this is not an issue when one is using VmSechedulerTimeShared
policy. This is because there is no commitment between the PE and the VM.
Therefore, the following assumption about the scheduling is valid and assumed
in CloudSim:
1. Consider time intervals of 1/10 sec.
2. The following schedule occurs:
interval 0..0.1:
VM0 gets 50MI from PE0 (out of 100MI available in the interval)
VM1 gets 100MI from PE1
VM2 gets 100MI from PE2
VM3 gets 100MI from PE3
VM4 gets 50MI from PE0
TOTALS PER VM: 50/100/100/100/50
interval 0.1..0.2:
VM0 gets 100MI from PE0 (out of 100MI available in the interval)
VM1 gets 50MI from PE1
VM2 gets 50MI from PE1
VM3 gets 100MI from PE2
VM4 gets 100MI from PE3
TOTALS PER VM: 150/150/150/200/150
interval 0.2..0.3:
VM0 gets 100MI from PE0 (out of 100MI available in the interval)
VM1 gets 100MI from PE1
VM2 gets 100MI from PE2
VM3 gets 50MI from PE3
VM4 gets 50MI from PE3
TOTALS PER VM: 250/250/250/250/200
interval 0.3..0.4:
VM0 gets 100MI from PE0 (out of 100MI available in the interval)
VM1 gets 100MI from PE1
VM2 gets 50MI from PE2
VM3 gets 50MI from PE2
VM4 gets 100MI from PE3
TOTALS PER VM: 350/350/300/300/300
interval 0.4..0.5:
VM0 gets 50MI from PE0 (out of 100MI available in the interval)
VM1 gets 50MI from PE0
VM2 gets 100MI from PE1
VM3 gets 100MI from PE2
VM4 gets 100MI from PE3
TOTALS PER VM: 400/400/400/400/400
At this point, half of the time is passed (0.5s) and each VM got half of their
required capacity for the time (400MI each).
This behaviour is expected for the VMSchedulerTimeShared.
Original comment by rodrigo.calheiros
on 14 Jan 2013 at 11:09
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
rodrigo.calheiros
on 9 Oct 2012 at 11:17