Perforamnce evaluation of the priority multi-service system mmap/ph/m/n using the monte carlo method
- Authors: Vishnevsky V.M.1, Klimenok V.I.2, Larionov A.A.1, Mukhtarov A.A.1, Sokolov A.M.1
-
Affiliations:
- V.A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS
- Belarusian State University
- Issue: No 103 (2023)
- Pages: 6-39
- Section: Systems analysis
- URL: https://medbiosci.ru/1819-2440/article/view/363795
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.25728/ubs.2023.103.1
- ID: 363795
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
In this paper, we present the results of a study of a priority multiline queuing system with a marked Markov arrival process (MMAP), phase-type service time (PH), and a buffer with finite capacity. Priority traffic classes differ in the probability of joining the queue, which depends on the number of customers in buffer, and in the service time PH distribution. If the buffer is full, customers don't join the system. An analytical model has been developed and studied for a particular case of a queueing system with two priority classes. We present an algorithm for calculating stationary probabilities of the system state, loss probabilities, the average number of customers in the queue, and other performance characteristics for this particular case. For the general case of a system with K-classes, a simulation model is constructed, with the help of which various characteristics of the system are studied.
About the authors
Vladimir Mironovich Vishnevsky
V.A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS
Email: vishn@inbox.ru
Moscow
Valentina Ivanovna Klimenok
Belarusian State University
Email: klimenok@bsu.by
Minsk
Andrey Alekseevich Larionov
V.A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS
Email: larioandr@gmail.com
Moscow
Amir Amangel'dyevich Mukhtarov
V.A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS
Email: mukhtarov.amir.a@gmail.com
Moscow
Aleksandr Mikhaylovich Sokolov
V.A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS
Email: aleksandr.sokolov@phystech.edu
Moscow
References
1. AKAN M. et al. A broader view of designing the liver allocationsystem // Oper. Res. – 2012. – Vol. 60, No. 4. – P. 757–770. 2. AWAN I., YOUNAS M., NAVEED W. Modelling QoS in IoTapplications // Proc. 2014 Int. Conf. Network-Based Inf. Syst.NBiS-2014. – 2014. – P. 99–105. 3. BOCHAROV P.P., D’APICE C., PECHINKIN A.V. QueueingTheory. – Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2003. 4. DUDIN A.N., KLIMENOK V.I., VISHNEVSKY V.M. Thetheory of queuing systems with correlated flows. // SpringerPublishing Company, Inc., 2019. – Iss. 1. – P. 1–410. 5. DUDIN S. et al. Improvement of the fairness of non-preemptivepriorities in the transmission of heterogeneous traffic //Mathematics. – 2020. – Vol. 8, No. 6. 6. DUDINA O., KIM C., DUDIN S. Retrial queuing systemwith Markovian arrival flow and phase-type service timedistribution // Comput. Ind. Eng. – 2013. – Vol. 66, No. 2. –P. 360–373. 7. EMARA M., ELSAWY H., BAUCH G. PrioritizedMultistream Traffic in Uplink IoT Networks: SpatiallyInteracting Vacation Queues // IEEE Internet of ThingsJournal. – 2021. – Vol. 8(3). – P. 1477–1491. – DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.3012515. 8. GRAHAM A. Kronecker Products and Matrix Calculus withApplications. – Courier Dover Publications, 2018. 9. HE Q.M., XIE J., ZHAO X. Priority queue with customerupgrades // Nav. Res. Logist. – 2012. – Vol. 59, No. 5. –P. 362–375. 10. HORVATH G. Efficient analysis of the queue length moments ofthe MMAP/MAP/1 preemptive priority queue // Perform. Eval. –2012. – Vol. 69, No. 12. – P. 684–700. 11. HEYMAN D.P., LUCANTONI D. Modeling Multiple IP TrafficStreams with Rate Limits // IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. – 2003. –Vol. 11, No. 6. – P. 948–958. 12. JOHNSON M.A., TAAFFE M.R. Matching moments to phasedistributions: Mixtures of erlang distributions of commonorder // Commun. Stat. Stoch. Model. – 1989. – Vol. 5, No. 4. –P. 711–743. 13. KLIMENOK V. et al. Queuing system with two types ofcustomers and dynamic change of a priority // Mathematics. –2020. – Vol. 8, No. 5. 14. KLIMENOK V., DUDIN A., VISHNEVSKY V. Prioritymulti-server queueing system with heterogeneous customers //Mathematics. – 2020. – Vol. 8, No. 9. 15. KLIMENOK V. et al. Lack of invariant property of the erlangloss model in case of MAP input // Queueing Syst. – 2005. –Vol. 49, No. 2. – P. 187–213. 16. LUCANTONI D.M. New results on the single server queuewith a batch markovian arrival process // Commun. Stat. Stoch.Model. – 1991. – Vol. 7, No. 1. – P. 1–46. 17. NEUTS M.F. Matrix-Geometric Solutions to StochasticModels // DGOR / Eds: H. Steckhan et al. – Berlin, Heidelberg:Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1984. – P. 425. 18. LUCANTONI D.M. Algorithms for the Multi-Server Queuewith Phase Type Service // Commun. Stat. Stoch. Model. –1985. – Vol. 1, No. 3. – P. 393–417. 19. MCWHERTER D.T. et al. Priority mechanisms for OLTP andtransactional Web applications // Proc. Int. Conf. Data Eng. –2004. – Vol. 20. – P. 535–546. 20. MURALIDHARAN S., ROY A., SAXENA N. MDP-IoT: MDPbased interest forwarding for heterogeneous traffic in IoT-NDNenvironment // Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. – 2018. – Vol. 79. –P. 892–908. 21. RAMASWAMI V. Independent Markov Processes in Parallel //Commun. Stat. Stoch. Model. – 1985. – Vol. 1, No. 3. –P. 419–432. 22. TACHIBANA T., FURUICHI T., MINENO H. Implementingand evaluating priority control mechanism for heterogeneousremote monitoring IOT system // ACM Int. Conf. ProceedingSer. – 2016. – Vol. 28 – November. – P. 239–244.
Supplementary files
