Hubbry Logo
Job queueJob queueMain
Open search
Job queue
Community hub
Job queue
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Job queue
Job queue
Job queue
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In system software, a job queue (a.k.a. batch queue, input queue), is a data structure maintained by job scheduler software containing jobs to run.[1]

Users submit their programs that they want executed, "jobs", to the queue for batch processing. The scheduler software maintains the queue as the pool of jobs available for it to run.

Multiple batch queues might be used by the scheduler to differentiate types of jobs depending on parameters such as:

The use of a batch queue gives these benefits:

  • sharing of computer resources among many users
  • time-shifts job processing to when the computer is less busy
  • avoids idling the compute resources without minute-by-minute human supervision
  • allows around-the-clock high utilization of expensive computing resources

Any process that comes to the CPU should wait in a queue.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Job queue

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A job queue is a data structure used in for job scheduling, where jobs, tasks, or processes are stored in an ordered list while awaiting execution by system resources such as processors or I/O devices. In operating systems, the job queue specifically maintains a set of all processes in the system, from which the scheduler selects jobs for admission into main memory, distinguishing it from related structures like the ready queue (which holds processes already in memory and waiting for ) and device queues (which manage processes awaiting I/O operations). This organization allows the operating system to optimize resource utilization by controlling the flow of processes through different states, such as new, ready, running, waiting, and terminated. Beyond traditional operating systems, job queues play a critical role in environments, where non-interactive tasks are queued for sequential execution to improve throughput in mainframe and server systems. In distributed and , such as AWS Batch, jobs are submitted to a job queue associated with compute environments, where they wait until resources become available, supporting scalable workloads across clusters, clouds, or grids. In software applications, job queues enable asynchronous processing by offloading time-intensive operations—like sending or —to background workers, decoupling them from user-facing requests to enhance and scalability.

Basic Concepts

Definition

A job queue is a in computing systems that holds pending tasks, referred to as jobs, awaiting execution by a scheduler, primarily in batch or asynchronous processing environments where tasks are processed in groups without requiring immediate user interaction. These jobs represent self-contained units of work, encompassing input data, executable processing instructions, and mechanisms for generating output, allowing them to operate independently once initiated. In contrast to real-time processing, which prioritizes immediate responsiveness to events with minimal latency, job queues support deferred execution suitable for non-urgent workloads where completion timing is flexible. Job queues are managed by schedulers that oversee , such as CPU cycles and memory, to selected jobs according to policies that balance efficiency, priority, and system utilization. For instance, a simple job queue might hold print jobs submitted by multiple users, them sequentially to manage printer access and prevent conflicts.

Key Components

A job queue system relies on fundamental operations for managing the flow of tasks: enqueue and dequeue. The enqueue operation adds a new job to the tail (rear) of the queue, preserving the first-in-first-out (FIFO) principle unless overridden by other mechanisms, which allows orderly submission of batch tasks in operating systems and distributed environments. Conversely, the dequeue operation removes the job at the head (front) of the queue when it is ready for execution, enabling the scheduler to dispatch it to available resources without disrupting the sequence of pending jobs. These operations ensure efficient in , where jobs await execution in a structured manner. Each job in the queue carries essential metadata, known as job attributes, that inform the scheduler's decisions. Priority attributes assign a numerical value (often ranging from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating precedence) to determine execution order among competing jobs, as implemented in systems like where factors such as user shares and queue settings influence this ranking. Dependencies specify prerequisites, such as waiting for another job to complete, preventing premature execution and supporting orchestration in tools like PBS Professional. Resource requirements detail the computational needs, including CPU cores, memory (e.g., specified in MB or GB units), and GPU allocations, ensuring jobs are matched to suitable hosts; for instance, Sun Grid Engine uses hard and soft requests to enforce these constraints. Estimated runtime provides a projected duration, aiding in backlog management and preventing resource monopolization, as seen in priority calculations that factor in walltime requests. Jobs within a queue transition through distinct states to track their lifecycle and enable recovery mechanisms. An active state indicates the job is running on allocated resources, consuming compute power until completion or interruption. Suspended states, such as user-suspended (USUSP) or system-suspended (SSUSP), pause execution temporarily—often due to load balancing or manual intervention—allowing resumption without restarting from the beginning. Completed states mark successful termination (e.g., DONE with zero exit code), freeing resources for subsequent jobs, while failure handling addresses errors through states like EXIT (non-zero exit) or FAULTED, where retries may be configured based on predefined limits to mitigate transient issues. These states facilitate monitoring and error recovery, ensuring queue integrity in high-throughput environments. For storage, job queues integrate with various data structures to balance performance and scalability. In operating systems, the job queue is typically maintained on secondary storage, such as a spool directory of job files or a database, holding processes awaiting admission into main memory; in contrast, the ready queue for processes in memory is often implemented as linked lists of process control blocks (PCBs), enabling dynamic insertion and removal at O(1) average time complexity for enqueue and dequeue, which suits variable workloads without fixed size limitations. Arrays provide an alternative for fixed-capacity queues, offering faster access via indices but requiring resizing for growth. In distributed and cloud settings, persistence is achieved through databases like MySQL or Redis, storing job records durably to survive node failures and support scalability; for example, Meta's FOQS uses sharded databases for a persistent priority queue handling millions of tasks. This integration ensures queues remain reliable across restarts or failures, with databases providing atomic operations for consistent state management.

Historical Development

Origins in Mainframe Computing

The concept of job queues emerged in the 1950s as part of early systems designed to manage punched-card inputs on mainframe computers like the , which was introduced in 1953 and relied on scheduled blocks of time for job execution to maximize resource utilization. These systems allowed multiple jobs to be prepared offline via punch cards and processed sequentially without immediate user interaction, marking an initial step toward structured queuing to handle computational tasks efficiently on vacuum-tube-based hardware. The primary purpose of these early job queues was to minimize costly idle time on expensive vacuum-tube machines, which consumed significant power even when inactive, by automating the transition from manual operator setup to queued job submission and execution. This shift reduced human intervention, enabling continuous operation and better throughput for scientific and business computations, as operators no longer needed to manually load and monitor each job in real-time. A key milestone came in 1964 with the release of IBM's OS/360 operating system, which introduced (JCL) as a standardized method for users to describe and submit jobs to the system queue, including specifications for resources, execution steps, and data handling. JCL facilitated automated queue management by allowing programmers to define job dependencies and control flow, significantly improving reliability on System/360 mainframes. Influential systems from the era included GEORGE 3, developed by International Computers and Tabulators (ICT) in the late 1960s for the 1900 series, which implemented queue management for both batch and multiprogramming environments to handle job submission, resource allocation, and operator commands efficiently. Similarly, Multics, initiated in 1965 as a collaborative project by MIT, Bell Labs, and General Electric, featured advanced job queueing where user jobs were divided into tasks placed in processor or I/O queues for dynamic scheduling in a time-sharing context.

Evolution in Modern Systems

In the late 1970s and early , Unix systems introduced user-level job queuing mechanisms that democratized scheduling beyond operator-controlled mainframes, with the at command enabling one-time task execution at specified future times and cron facilitating periodic automation through crontab files. These tools, originating at , allowed individual users to manage lightweight queues on multi-user workstations, emphasizing simplicity and integration with the shell environment for tasks like backups or report generation. By the , cron had become a standard in Unix variants, including early distributions, supporting daemon-driven execution that queued jobs based on time specifications without requiring system reboots. This user-centric approach persisted into the with the adoption of in major distributions starting around 2010, which introduced timer units as an evolution of cron and at for more robust service management. timers provide calendar-based or monotonic scheduling with enhanced features like dependency resolution, resource limiting, and logging integration, allowing jobs to be queued and executed in a unified system that handles both boot-time and runtime queuing more efficiently than standalone daemons. For instance, timers can persist across reboots and support randomized delays to avoid thundering herds, marking a refinement in local queuing for modern, containerized environments. The 1990s brought distributed shifts through , exemplified by the system developed in 1988 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, which pioneered networked job queues by matchmaking compute-intensive tasks to idle workstations across a cluster. treated the queue as a centralized negotiator for over LANs, enabling fault-tolerant submission and migration of jobs in heterogeneous environments, thus laying groundwork for high-throughput distributed queuing beyond single-site boundaries. This facilitated early grid infrastructures where queues spanned multiple institutions, prioritizing opportunistic scheduling to maximize utilization. In the cloud era from the mid-2000s, job queues integrated deeply with virtualized infrastructures for global scalability and resilience, as seen with Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) entering production in 2006 to provide decoupled, durable messaging in distributed applications. SQS supports unlimited queues with automatic scaling to handle petabyte-scale throughput and offers at-least-once delivery with configurable visibility timeouts for fault tolerance. Microsoft Azure Queue Storage, launched alongside the platform's general availability in 2010, similarly enables fault-tolerant queuing with up to 200 terabytes per queue and geo-redundant replication across regions. These services shifted queues to serverless models, emphasizing elasticity—such as auto-scaling based on message volume—and redundancy to ensure availability during failures, contrasting earlier local systems by supporting asynchronous processing in microservices architectures.

Types of Job Queues

FIFO Queues

A First-In-First-Out (FIFO) job queue operates on the principle that jobs are processed in the exact order of their arrival, ensuring a strict sequence where the earliest submitted job is the first to be executed. This approach, also known as First-Come-First-Served (FCFS) in scheduling contexts, maintains fairness by treating all jobs equally without regard to their individual characteristics such as execution time or urgency. In operating systems, FIFO queues are implemented using linear data structures like linked lists or arrays, where jobs are enqueued at the rear and dequeued from the front, preventing any overtaking or reordering. The mechanics of a FIFO job queue enforce a linear ordering of tasks, which is particularly suitable for environments involving non-urgent, sequential processing such as system backups or operations. Upon arrival, a job is appended to the end of the queue, and the processes it only after all preceding jobs have completed, resulting in predictable throughput for steady workloads. This no-overtaking rule simplifies , as need only monitor the queue head without complex . Key advantages of FIFO queues include their inherent simplicity, which allows for straightforward implementation with minimal computational overhead, making them ideal for resource-constrained systems. They provide predictable behavior, enabling users to anticipate processing times based solely on queue length and job arrival patterns, thus promoting equitable treatment across submissions. Additionally, the low overhead in maintenance—requiring only enqueue and dequeue operations—supports efficient handling of moderate-volume tasks without the need for additional metadata. However, FIFO queues exhibit limitations in scenarios requiring responsiveness to varying job priorities, as urgent short jobs may be delayed indefinitely behind long-running predecessors, leading to the convoy effect where overall system efficiency suffers. For instance, in print spooler systems, a large document submitted early can block subsequent small print jobs, causing unnecessary delays for users despite the availability of printer resources. This inefficiency highlights FIFO's unsuitability for interactive or time-sensitive applications, where average waiting times can fluctuate widely based on job length distributions.

Priority and Multi-level Queues

In priority-based job queues, each job is assigned a priority level that determines its execution order relative to others, allowing systems to favor critical tasks over less urgent ones. Priorities are typically tagged numerically, with lower numbers indicating higher urgency—for instance, interactive jobs like user inputs receive high priority (e.g., level 1), while batch processing jobs get low priority (e.g., level 10). This assignment can be static, based on job type or user specification, or dynamic, adjusted by system policies. Priority scheduling operates in either preemptive mode, where a higher-priority job interrupts a running lower-priority one, or non-preemptive mode, where the current job completes before switching. Multi-level queues extend this by organizing jobs into separate queues, each dedicated to a specific class or priority band, ensuring isolated handling for different workload types. For example, in Unix-like systems, the nice command allows users to adjust a process's priority within a range from -20 (highest) to 19 (lowest), placing it in an appropriate queue relative to system processes (which run at higher priorities) versus user tasks. Multi-level feedback queues add dynamism by allowing jobs to migrate between levels based on behavior: short, interactive jobs stay in high-priority queues, while CPU-intensive jobs demote to lower levels over time, approximating shortest-job-first scheduling without prior knowledge. Practical implementations illustrate these concepts effectively. In , tasks are assigned priorities from 0 (highest) to 10 (lowest), with levels 4–6 for interactive foreground work and 7–8 for background operations, influencing CPU allocation during execution. Similarly, the Hadoop Fair Scheduler employs hierarchical queues descending from a root queue, where resources are fairly allocated among child queues based on configured weights and user classes, supporting multi-tenant environments. While priority and multi-level queues enhance for time-sensitive jobs—such as reducing latency for interactive applications—they introduce trade-offs like potential of low-priority tasks, where high-priority jobs indefinitely delay others, though aging mechanisms can mitigate this by periodically boosting waiting jobs' priorities. This structure contrasts with simpler FIFO queues by prioritizing urgency over arrival order, improving overall system efficiency in mixed workloads at the cost of equitable resource distribution.

Implementation Approaches

In Operating Systems

In operating systems, job queues are integral to kernel-level management, enabling the efficient handling of tasks awaiting execution on a single . The kernel maintains queues to track in various states, such as ready (eligible for CPU allocation), blocked (waiting for I/O or resources), or running. These queues facilitate context switching, where the CPU saves the state of the current —including registers, , and page tables—and restores the state of another from the ready queue. This mechanism is triggered by interrupts, I/O completions, or explicit yields, ensuring multitasking without direct hardware support for multiple . Handling interrupts involves prioritizing them via lines, queuing associated tasks in kernel structures like wait queues, and resuming normal scheduling afterward. In systems such as , the kernel uses per-CPU runqueues to implement the ready queue as part of the (CFS). Each runqueue organizes tasks in a red-black tree based on virtual runtime, allowing efficient selection of the next runnable while balancing fairness and low latency. Processes enter the ready queue upon creation or wakeup from blocked states, managed through functions like enqueue_task() and dequeue_task(), with bitmaps tracking priority levels from 0 to 139. Blocked processes are placed in wait queues—doubly linked lists headed by wait_queue_head_t—for events like I/O completion or availability, protected by spinlocks to handle concurrent access. switching occurs via the schedule() function, which invokes __switch_to() to swap thread states, update the CR3 register for page tables, and manage (FPU) lazily to minimize overhead. User-space tools in Unix/ extend kernel queues for specific job types, such as printing via the lp command, which submits files to a print queue managed by the CUPS (Common Unix Printing System) scheduler. The lp utility copies input to spool directories like /var/spool/cups/ and logs requests, allowing jobs to be prioritized, paused, or canceled while awaiting printer availability. For periodic tasks, the daemon maintains a queue of scheduled jobs from crontab files, checking them every minute and executing matching entries as child processes if the system is running; missed jobs due to downtime are not queued for later execution unless using the at utility for one-time deferral. In Windows, the NT kernel employs ready queues—one per priority level (0-31)—to hold threads in the ready state, organized within the DispatcherReadyListHead for quick access by the scheduler. The selects the highest-priority thread from these queues during time slices or preemptions, supporting variable quantum lengths based on priority to favor interactive tasks. switching in Windows involves the kernel saving thread (e.g., registers and stack pointers) in the ETHREAD , updating the kernel process block (KPROCESS), and handling interrupts through the interrupt , which queues deferred procedure calls (DPCs) for non-urgent processing. For job management, (WMI) provides the CIM_Job class to represent schedulable units of work, such as print or maintenance tasks, distinct from processes as they can be queued and executed asynchronously via scripts or services. Examples of job queuing in these systems include cron jobs in , where administrators schedule recurring maintenance like log rotation by adding entries to /etc/crontab, leveraging the kernel's process creation to enqueue and execute them periodically. In DOS and Windows, batch files (.bat) enable sequential job execution via the command interpreter (), where commands run one after another; for deferred queuing, the legacy AT command schedules batch jobs to run at specified times, integrating with the kernel's scheduler to launch them as batch-logon sessions.

In Distributed and Cloud Environments

In distributed and cloud environments, job queues extend beyond single-node operations to manage workloads across multiple machines, clusters, or global infrastructures, emphasizing to handle high volumes of tasks and reliability to withstand network failures or node outages. These systems decouple task producers (e.g., applications generating jobs) from consumers (e.g., workers processing them), allowing asynchronous execution and load balancing over networks. plays a central role, with tools like and enabling this decoupling by routing messages through persistent queues that buffer tasks until processed. RabbitMQ, an open-source message broker, supports job and task queues by distributing workloads to multiple consumers, such as in scenarios involving email processing or notifications, where producers publish tasks without direct consumer interaction. This decoupling absorbs load spikes, as the broker handles queuing independently, and features like message acknowledgments ensure tasks are not lost during processing. For scalability, RabbitMQ employs clustering and federation to span distributed nodes, while quorum queues provide replication for reliability. Similarly, Apache Kafka functions as a distributed event streaming platform for job-like queues, where producers publish events to topics without awareness of consumers, achieving high throughput in real-time applications like payment processing. Kafka's design ensures producers and consumers remain fully decoupled, supporting scalability through topic partitioning across brokers. Cloud providers offer managed services tailored for serverless job queuing in distributed setups. Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) provides fully managed, serverless queues that decouple and distributed systems by storing messages durably, enabling scalable job handling with at-least-once delivery in standard queues or exactly-once in FIFO queues. SQS scales transparently to manage bursts without provisioning, using redundant distribution of messages across servers for . Google Cloud Tasks, a fully managed service, queues HTTP-based distributed tasks for execution on endpoints like App Engine or external servers, facilitating asynchronous processing such as scheduled workflows integrated with Cloud Functions. It supports scalability for large task volumes and reliability through features like dead-letter queues for failed tasks. Distributed job queues address key challenges like and load distribution through replication and partitioning. Replication maintains multiple copies of queued tasks across nodes or brokers, ensuring continuity if a component fails; for instance, Kafka topics use a replication factor (commonly 3) to duplicate partitions geo-regionally, preserving data durability. Partitioning divides queues into subsets distributed across the system, balancing load by allowing parallel processing; in Kafka, topics are split into partitions for concurrent reads and writes, preventing bottlenecks in high-scale environments. These mechanisms enable job queues to operate resiliently in multi-tenant clouds, where failures are common. Practical implementations include Job resources, which orchestrate pod-based tasks in containerized clusters for distributed . A Job creates Pods to run finite tasks to completion, supporting parallel execution via work queues where Pods coordinate externally, and retries failures until a specified number of successes (e.g., computing π in a container). In contexts, Hadoop manages job queues through its ResourceManager, which allocates resources via pluggable schedulers like the Capacity Scheduler. 's hierarchical queues partition cluster capacity (e.g., assigning 12.5% to a queue) for multi-tenant distribution, enabling scalable job submission and monitoring across thousands of nodes.

Scheduling Mechanisms

Basic Algorithms

The basic algorithms for scheduling in job queue systems draw from foundational principles used in operating systems for managing job admission and execution, emphasizing simplicity, fairness, and efficiency in . While job queues focus on long-term scheduling for admitting jobs into , similar algorithms to those used for short-term CPU scheduling on ready queues can apply, selecting jobs based on arrival order, estimated runtime, or time slices to optimize performance. First-Come, First-Served (FCFS), also known as First-In, First-Out (FIFO), is the simplest non-preemptive scheduling , where jobs are processed in the order of their arrival to the job queue for admission into memory. This approach ensures no job overtakes another, making it suitable for batch environments with low overhead. In job queues, it can lead to delays for short jobs behind long ones, similar to the "convoy effect" in CPU scheduling; for example, with jobs of 100 seconds, 10 seconds, and 10 seconds, the average may be prolonged compared to more optimal ordering. Shortest Job First (SJF) is a non-preemptive that prioritizes the job with the shortest estimated runtime from the job queue, aiming to minimize average waiting time for admission. SJF reduces queue congestion by handling shorter jobs first and is optimal for average turnaround when runtimes are known. However, it requires accurate estimates and risks for long jobs. Round-Robin (RR) can be adapted for job queues by assigning time quanta or resource slices in a cyclic manner to promote fairness, though it is more commonly used for CPU allocation in ready queues. In job admission contexts, it helps balance load without indefinite blocking. Evaluation metrics include throughput (jobs completed per unit time), response time (from arrival to first resource access), and CPU utilization (active processing proportion), applicable to both job and ready queue scheduling.

Advanced Techniques

Multilevel feedback queues represent an adaptive scheduling approach that refines priority assignments based on observed behavior, allowing short or interactive jobs to maintain higher priorities while preventing long-running jobs from being indefinitely . In this system, begin at the highest-priority queue and are demoted to lower-priority queues upon exhausting their time quantum in a given level, with each subsequent queue typically featuring a larger time slice to accommodate CPU-intensive tasks. To mitigate , mechanisms such as aging periodically increment the priority of lower-level jobs, ensuring they eventually receive ; for instance, every fixed interval (e.g., 100 ms), all jobs may be boosted back to the top queue. This dynamic adjustment approximates optimal scheduling by favoring responsive jobs without requiring prior knowledge of their runtime characteristics. Backfilling enhances queue efficiency in (HPC) environments by permitting shorter or lower-priority jobs to execute in idle resource gaps ahead of scheduled larger jobs, provided they complete before the anticipated start of those larger jobs. This technique, often implemented as conservative or EASY backfilling, maintains the original start time of the first queued job while filling voids created by resource fragmentation, thereby improving overall system utilization without violating fairness guarantees. In practice, schedulers estimate job runtimes to select backfillable jobs, inserting them opportunistically to reduce wait times; for example, studies show average waiting time reductions of 11-42% across workloads. Backfilling builds on foundational first-come-first-served policies but introduces lookahead to exploit parallelism in multiprocessor setups. Fair share scheduling allocates computational resources proportionally among user groups or accounts to enforce equitable long-term usage, adjusting job priorities based on historical consumption relative to allocated shares. Developed initially for multi-user systems, it computes a fair-share factor using on past usage (e.g., with a parameter) normalized against shares, such that over-utilizing groups receive lower priorities while under-utilizers gain higher ones; the priority multiplier is often derived as F=2−(UE/S)F = 2^{-(UE/S)}, where UEUE is effective usage and SS is shares. In cluster management tools like SLURM, this is applied hierarchically across accounts and users—for instance, if an account holds 40% of total shares divided among subgroups, subaccount overages penalize their members' jobs accordingly. This method promotes balanced access in shared environments like university clusters, reducing dominance by high-volume users. Integration of into job queue management enables predictive queuing for resource estimation, particularly in autoscaling, by demands from historical patterns to preemptively adjust capacity. Models such as time-series forecasters (e.g., or LSTM) analyze queue metrics like length and arrival rates to predict future loads, triggering scaling actions before congestion occurs; for example, in serverless platforms, ML-driven prediction can reduce cold starts by approximately 27% compared to reactive methods. This approach supports dynamic environments by estimating job resource needs (e.g., CPU/) via on past executions, optimizing autoscaling policies in systems like AWS. Seminal implementations demonstrate improved accuracy in heterogeneous s, where predictions queue and allocation. Emerging techniques, such as for backfilling as of 2024, further enhance adaptive scheduling in HPC and systems.

Applications and Use Cases

Batch Processing Systems

Batch jobs in traditional systems are characterized by their offline execution of scripts or programs, operating without real-time user interaction to handle large-scale, repetitive tasks. These jobs are particularly suited to non-interactive workloads, such as monthly computations that employee in bulk or scientific simulations that model complex phenomena over extended periods. This approach allows systems to accumulate and execute multiple similar operations efficiently, minimizing overhead from frequent setup and teardown. Job queues serve a pivotal role in batch environments by grouping submitted jobs into coherent batches for sequential execution, ensuring that resources are allocated systematically to maintain processing order and dependencies. In mainframe , Job Control Language (JCL) provides the scripting mechanism to define job parameters, including program execution details, resource requirements, and specifications, which are then submitted to the queue for automated handling. This queuing mechanism originated in early mainframe systems to streamline non-interactive workloads but has evolved to support modern batch orchestration. Key tools for managing job queues in batch processing include the Job Entry Subsystem (JES) within IBM z/OS, which receives jobs, schedules them for execution, and controls output distribution in large-scale enterprise settings to optimize throughput for batch workloads. In open-source ecosystems, facilitates workflow queuing by defining directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) for batch tasks, enabling scheduling, dependency management, and monitoring of sequential or parallel job flows in data-intensive applications. The integration of job queues in batch systems yields significant benefits, particularly for I/O-bound tasks where processing involves substantial data reads and writes, allowing the system to overlap operations and reduce idle time on peripherals like disks or tapes. Furthermore, by scheduling batches during off-peak hours, these queues enable resource optimization, lowering costs and contention in shared environments while maximizing utilization of computing infrastructure for non-urgent workloads.

High-Performance and Cloud Computing

In (HPC), job queues manage resource allocation on supercomputers for compute-intensive tasks like simulations and scientific modeling. Systems such as the (PBS) organize jobs into queues with configurable properties, including the number of available nodes and maximum run times, to prioritize production, debug, and development workloads on clusters like those operated by . Similarly, employs queues to schedule job submissions via commands like bsub, matching jobs to resources based on requirements such as CPU cores and , which supports parallel execution across heterogeneous HPC environments. These queue-based schedulers enable efficient handling of job arrays, where multiple related tasks are submitted together for distributed processing in supercomputing facilities. In , job queues underpin serverless functions and orchestration by decoupling task submission from execution. , for example, uses (SQS) queues to trigger serverless functions in response to incoming messages, facilitating event-driven workflows where queues buffer asynchronous requests for scalable invocation. This integration supports architectures by enabling reliable between components, such as processing user events or responses without direct service coupling. In serverless queue processing, SQS acts as an event source for , allowing batching of messages and concurrency controls to optimize throughput for dynamic applications. Scalability features in job queues address bursty workloads, such as those in data analytics, by dynamically adjusting resources to match demand. Auto-scaling mechanisms monitor queue depth and load metrics to provision compute instances automatically, as seen in AWS Batch, which scales containerized jobs for variable analytics pipelines without predefined limits. Event-driven autoscaling based on queue backlog enables rapid response to spikes, reducing latency for bursty tasks like real-time ingestion or ETL operations. Predictive approaches further refine this by workload patterns to preemptively allocate resources, enhancing efficiency in environments with irregular traffic. Notable examples include Google Cloud Batch for training, where queues schedule containerized jobs across scalable compute pools for tasks like model fine-tuning with tools such as , supporting GPU-accelerated workflows without infrastructure management. Azure Batch similarly handles by managing virtual machine pools and job queues for large-scale HPC simulations, automating task distribution to achieve high throughput in distributed environments.

Challenges and Optimizations

Common Issues

One prevalent issue in job queue operations is , where low-priority jobs are indefinitely delayed despite being ready for execution. This occurs primarily in priority-based scheduling within multi-user operating systems, as higher-priority processes continuously and consume resources, preventing lower-priority ones from progressing. In multi-user setups, such as systems, symptoms include degraded response times for interactive low-priority tasks and potential system unfairness, where batch jobs or user processes with lower priorities exhibit no progress even as the queue accumulates higher-priority arrivals. Deadlocks represent another critical problem in job queue systems, arising from circular dependencies in that halt all involved processes. These occur when multiple jobs hold resources (e.g., locks on or I/O devices) while waiting for others held by different jobs, forming a cycle that blocks progress entirely. In shared queue environments, exacerbates this, as seen in scenarios where job A holds a disk and awaits a printer held by job B, which in turn requests the disk, leading to a standstill in multi-process scheduling. Symptoms manifest as frozen system activity, with queues stalling and no forward movement until external intervention, particularly in resource-constrained setups like multiprocessor systems. Queue management overhead imposes significant performance impacts, stemming from the computational costs of maintaining and manipulating queue structures. Context switching between jobs incurs substantial latency, typically on the order of microseconds per switch, as saves and restores states, registers, and mappings, during which no productive work occurs. Excessive or tracing for queue operations can further contribute to bloat, increasing storage demands and cycles without advancing job execution, especially in complex multilevel queues where frequent priority adjustments and movements amplify these costs. Scalability limits emerge in high-volume job queues lacking partitioning, creating bottlenecks that degrade throughput as load increases. In distributed environments, unpartitioned queues—such as those implemented via a single database table for job status—suffer from contention on shared resources like locks and scans, leading to serialized access and diminished performance under . Without sharding or distribution across nodes, these systems hit capacity ceilings due to network latency in resource coordination and I/O bottlenecks, resulting in queue backlogs and reduced overall system efficiency in or cluster settings.

Mitigation Strategies

To mitigate starvation in job queues, where low-priority jobs risk indefinite delays due to higher-priority ones, aging mechanisms dynamically adjust priorities over time. These systems periodically boost the priority of waiting low-priority jobs, ensuring eventual progress even in high-contention scenarios. For instance, in cloud-based scheduling, an anti- mechanism interleaves low-priority requests with higher ones, maintaining throughput while preventing delays exceeding a threshold, as demonstrated in evaluations showing reduced variance in response times under load. Complementary to aging, fair-share policies enforce equitable by tracking historical usage and assigning proportional shares via identifiers. In AWS Batch, fair-share scheduling groups jobs under share identifiers, prioritizing those from underutilized shares to balance cluster resources dynamically, which improves overall job completion rates in multi-tenant environments. Similarly, Spark's fair sharing policy distributes tasks across jobs in a round-robin manner, allocating equal portions of cluster resources to active jobs and scaling shares as new ones arrive, thereby sustaining balanced performance in distributed . Deadlock prevention in job queues focuses on eliminating conditions like circular waits through structured resource acquisition. Resource ordering assigns unique numerical identifiers to all resources, mandating that jobs request them in strictly increasing order, which breaks potential cycles by imposing a on allocations. This technique, applied in operating system schedulers, ensures no circular dependencies form, as processes cannot hold a higher-numbered resource while waiting for a lower one. Timeouts provide an additional safeguard by automatically releasing held resources after a predefined period of inaction, forcing job abortion or rescheduling to avoid prolonged holds that could lead to deadlocks. In distributed settings, detection via graph algorithms complements prevention; wait-for graphs model dependencies as directed edges between jobs, with centralized coordinators periodically constructing global graphs to identify cycles indicating deadlocks, enabling targeted resolution like preempting involved jobs. Distributed variants, such as edge-chasing algorithms, propagate probes along graph edges to detect cycles without full graph construction, reducing overhead in large-scale systems. Performance tuning in job queues emphasizes and to handle varying loads efficiently. Asynchronous offloads long-running tasks from main threads to background workers, decoupling submission from execution and reducing latency for users. In enterprise platforms like , asynchronous queues distribute workloads across instances, optimizing resource use by queuing non-urgent operations and them in parallel without blocking synchronous paths. Sharding further enhances throughput by partitioning queues across multiple nodes or instances, isolating workloads to prevent bottlenecks. For example, in Ruby-based systems like Sidekiq, sharding bulk queues into dedicated partitions limits resource contention from high-volume users, improving isolation and enabling horizontal scaling while maintaining low tail latencies. Monitoring tools like provide real-time visibility into queue dynamics, exposing metrics such as queue depth, rates, and consumer lag. RabbitMQ's Prometheus exporter, for instance, tracks queue counts and delivery rates, allowing alerts on anomalies like growing backlogs, which facilitates proactive tuning in message-driven job systems. Dask distributed clusters similarly expose Prometheus endpoints for task queue metrics, including pending tasks and worker utilization, aiding in capacity planning for workloads. Reliability enhancements in job queues address failures through retry-safe designs and fault-tolerant coordination. Idempotency ensures that retrying a failed job produces the same outcome as a single execution, preventing duplicates or inconsistencies from partial failures. In queue libraries like BullMQ, jobs incorporate idempotent operations—such as unique keys for database updates—allowing safe retries without side effects, which is critical for at-least-once delivery semantics in distributed environments. For consistency across nodes, distributed consensus protocols like underpin reliable queue state management. etcd, a key-value store often used for queue coordination, employs to replicate logs and achieve quorum-based agreement on job states, tolerating node failures while ensuring linearizable consistency for operations like enqueuing and dequeuing in clustered setups. This consensus mechanism guarantees that queue mutations are durable and ordered, enhancing in cloud-native job orchestration.

References

  1. https://www.ituonline.com/tech-definitions/what-is-a-job-queue/
  2. https://cps-cse.media.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2687/2019/09/ch3.pdf
  3. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.5?topic=life-job-enters-job-queue
  4. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/batch/latest/userguide/job_queues.html
  5. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/system-design/task-queues-system-design/
  6. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/operating-systems/types-of-scheduling-queues/
  7. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.5.0?topic=life-job-enters-job-queue
  8. https://acs-docs.readthedocs.io/clusters/general-usage/5-jobs/1-lsf.html
  9. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/data-engineering/what-is-the-difference-between-batch-processing-and-real-time-processing/
  10. https://dzone.com/articles/batch-vs-real-time-processing-understanding-the-differences
  11. https://www.designgurus.io/answers/detail/what-is-a-scheduler-in-os
  12. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/operating-systems/process-schedulers-in-operating-system/
  13. https://www.stptexas.com/blog/what-are-print-queues
  14. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spectrum-lsf/10.1.0?topic=files-lsbqueues
  15. https://docs.adaptivecomputing.com/torque/4-0-2/Content/topics/commands/qsub.htm
  16. https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19957-01/820-0699/i1003714/index.html
  17. https://researchcomputing.princeton.edu/support/knowledge-base/job-priority
  18. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spectrum-lsf/10.1.0?topic=execution-about-job-states
  19. https://techdocs.broadcom.com/us/en/ca-enterprise-software/intelligent-automation/autosys-workload-automation/12-0/scheduling/ae-scheduling/manage-your-jobs/job-states.html
  20. https://www.tutorialspoint.com/operating_system/os_process_scheduling.htm
  21. https://engineering.fb.com/2021/02/22/production-engineering/foqs-scaling-a-distributed-priority-queue/
  22. https://www.dbos.dev/blog/durable-queues
  23. https://ethw.org/First-Hand:Measurement_in_Early_Software
  24. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/07/the-ibm-mainframe-how-it-runs-and-why-it-survives/
  25. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1672035
  26. http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/os/R20.1_Mar71/GC28-6704-1_OS_JCL_Reference_Rel_20.1_Jun71.pdf
  27. https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/acl/pdfs/icl1900_intro_george3.pdf
  28. https://cics.umass.edu/~emery/classes/cmpsci691st/readings/OS/multics-overview.pdf
  29. https://www.redwood.com/article/unix-job-scheduling/
  30. https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Systemd/Timers
  31. https://research.cs.wisc.edu/htcondor/doc/icdcs1988.pdf
  32. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon_simple_q/
  33. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSSimpleQueueService/latest/SQSDeveloperGuide/welcome.html
  34. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/storageservices/previous-azure-storage-service-versions
  35. https://cs341.cs.illinois.edu/coursebook/Scheduling
  36. https://www.cs.csustan.edu/~john/Classes/CS3750/Notes/Chap05/05_CPU_Scheduling.html
  37. https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/Classes/537/Fall2005/Lectures/lecture9.pdf
  38. https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~lee/03cse380/lectures/ln7-sched-v3.2pp.pdf
  39. https://lass.cs.umass.edu/~shenoy/courses/fall12/lectures/Lec05.pdf
  40. http://www.cs.rpi.edu/academics/courses/fall04/os/c8/
  41. https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~junfeng/13fa-w4118/lectures/l12-sched.pdf
  42. https://eng.libretexts.org/Courses/Delta_College/Introduction_to_Operating_Systems/14%253A_Uniprocessor_CPU_Scheduling/14.02%253A_Scheduling_Algorithms
  43. https://www.cse.fau.edu/~sam/course/operating_systems/hw/osQuesCh5-8.pdf
  44. https://www.cs.uic.edu/~jbell/CourseNotes/OperatingSystems/5_CPU_Scheduling.html
  45. https://people.csail.mit.edu/rinard/teaching/osnotes/h6.html
  46. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall08/cos318/lectures/Lec7-Scheduling
  47. https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/cpu-sched-mlfq.pdf
  48. https://www.cs.tufts.edu/comp/15/reference/unix_tips/nice.html
  49. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/taskschd/tasksettings-priority
  50. https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-site/FairScheduler.html
  51. https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~rossbach/cs380p/papers/ulk3.pdf
  52. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/lp.1.html
  53. https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_linux/6/html/deployment_guide/ch-automating_system_tasks
  54. https://download.microsoft.com/download/1/4/0/14045a9e-c978-47d1-954b-92b9fd877995/97807356648739_samplechapters.pdf
  55. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/cimwin32prov/cim-job
  56. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/it-pro/windows-10/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/log-on-as-a-batch-job
  57. https://www.rabbitmq.com/
  58. https://kafka.apache.org/intro
  59. https://www.rabbitmq.com/docs
  60. https://www.rabbitmq.com/docs/quorum-queues
  61. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSSimpleQueueService/latest/SQSDeveloperGuide/standard-queues-at-least-once-delivery.html
  62. https://cloud.google.com/tasks/docs
  63. https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design
  64. https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#intro_concepts_and_terms
  65. https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/job/
  66. https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/job/#running-multiple-parallel-jobs-from-a-work-queue
  67. https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-site/YARN.html
  68. https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-site/CapacityScheduler.html
  69. https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/cpu-sched.pdf
  70. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/opre.2.1.70
  71. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/opre.4.1.76
  72. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1889001
  73. https://jsspp.org/papers17/paper_5.pdf
  74. https://slurm.schedmd.com/classic_fair_share.html
  75. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-fair-share-scheduler-Kay-Lauder/98b598e6b0494ac95f61159c4f3e3580d4b5ab37
  76. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3963/paper7.pdf
  77. https://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol16/p3808-yang.pdf
  78. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.09264
  79. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/batch-processing.asp
  80. https://rescale.com/batch-processing/
  81. https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/batch-processing/
  82. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos-basic-skills?topic=sdsf-what-is-jcl
  83. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos-basic-skills?topic=jobs-batch-processing-jes-scenario-1
  84. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos-basic-skills?topic=jobs-what-is-jes
  85. https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/index.html
  86. https://www.acceldata.io/blog/batch-processing-demystified-tools-challenges-and-solutions
  87. https://www.jamsscheduler.com/blog/how-businesses-benefit-from-batch-job-scheduling-and-when-to-use-it/
  88. https://www.nas.nasa.gov/hecc/support/kb/pbs-job-queue-structure_187.html
  89. https://www.purdue.edu/hla/sites/varalalab/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2018/02/Lecture_6.pdf
  90. https://hpc.research.cchmc.org/lsf-examples
  91. https://blog.dask.org/2018/10/08/Dask-Jobqueue
  92. https://www.serverless.com/framework/docs/providers/aws/events/sqs
  93. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/concepts-event-driven-architectures.html
  94. https://pages.awscloud.com/Best-Practices-for-Serverless-Queue-Processing_2019_0205-SRV_OD.html
  95. https://cloudchipr.com/blog/aws-batch
  96. https://dev.to/aws-builders/event-driven-batch-processing-on-aws-from-scheduled-tasks-to-auto-scaling-workloads-20a6
  97. https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/17/5551
  98. https://docs.cloud.google.com/batch/docs/get-started
  99. https://medium.com/google-cloud/model-fine-tuning-made-easy-with-axolotl-on-google-cloud-batch-e67d71208903
  100. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/batch/batch-technical-overview
  101. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/batch/tutorial-parallel-dotnet
  102. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall10/cos318/lectures/CPUScheduling.pdf
  103. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall15/cos318/lectures/9.Deadlock.pdf
  104. https://www.cs.uic.edu/~jbell/CourseNotes/OperatingSystems/6_CPU_Scheduling.html
  105. https://cacm.acm.org/practice/20-obstacles-to-scalability/
  106. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotcloud13/hotcloud13-blagojevic.pdf
  107. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/batch/latest/userguide/scheduling-policies.html
  108. https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/job-scheduling.html
  109. https://www.cs.uic.edu/~jbell/CourseNotes/OperatingSystems/7_Deadlocks.html
  110. https://www.cs.uic.edu/~ajayk/Chapter10.pdf
  111. https://architect.salesforce.com/decision-guides/async-processing
  112. https://www.mikeperham.com/2019/12/17/workload-isolation-with-queue-sharding/
  113. https://www.rabbitmq.com/docs/prometheus
  114. https://distributed.dask.org/en/stable/prometheus.html
  115. https://docs.bullmq.io/patterns/idempotent-jobs
  116. https://etcd.io/docs/v3.2/faq/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.