Partial sharing allows providers to possibly pool a fraction of their resources when full pooling is not beneficial to them. Recent work in systems without sharing has shown that redundancy can improve performance considerably. In this paper, we combine partial sharing and redundancy by developing partial sharing models for providers operating multi-server systems with redundancy. Two M M N queues with redundant service models are considered. Copies of an arriving job are placed in the queues of servers that can serve the job. Partial sharing models for cancel-on-complete and cancel-on-start redundancy models are developed. For cancel-on-complete, it is shown that the Pareto efficient region is the full pooling configuration. For a cancel-on-start policy, we conjecture that the Pareto frontier is always non-empty and is such that at least one of the two providers is sharing all of its resources. For this system, using bargaining theory the sharing configuration that the providers may use is determined. Mean response time and probability of waiting are the performance metrics considered.
In contrast, our approach in this work is to analyze resource sharing between strategic service providers having non-transferable utility. In other words, no side-payments are allowed between the service providers. Instead, providers would (partially or completely) pool their resources with one another only if their service quality improves in the process. Our goal is thus to devise mechanisms that guarantee mutually beneficial sharing configurations. The only prior work we are aware of that takes this view is @cite_12 , which considers loss systems. In contrast, the present paper considers service systems where jobs can be queued. As it turns out, the appropriate sharing mechanisms are very different between these two settings.
@cite_12
2951341827 2099376907 2614461528 2101665044
Fragmentation of expensive resources, e.g., spectrum for wireless services, between providers can introduce inefficiencies in resource utilisation and worsen overall system performance. In such cases, resource pooling between independent service providers can be used to improve performance. However, for providers to agree to pool their resources, the arrangement has to be mutually beneficial. The traditional notion of resource pooling, which implies complete sharing, need not have this property. For example, under full pooling, one of the providers may be worse off and hence have no incentive to participate. In this paper, we propose partial resource sharing models as a generalization of full pooling, which can be configured to be beneficial to all participants. We formally define and analyze two partial sharing models between two service providers, each of which is an Erlang-B loss system with the blocking probabilities as the performance measure. We show that there always exist partial sharing configurations that are beneficial to both providers, irrespective of the load and the number of circuits of each of the providers. A key result is that the Pareto frontier has at least one of the providers sharing all its resources with the other. Furthermore, full pooling may not lie inside this Pareto set. The choice of the sharing configurations within the Pareto set is formalized based on bargaining theory. Finally, large system approximations of the blocking probabilities in the quality-efficiency-driven regime are presented. In this paper we model and study the performance of peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing systems in terms of their 'service capacity'. We identify two regimes of interest: the transient and stationary regimes. We show that in both regimes, the performance of P2P systems exhibits a favorable scaling with the offered load. P2P systems achieve this by efficiently leveraging the service capacity of other peers, who possibly are concurrently downloading the same file. Therefore to improve the performance, it is important to design mechanisms to give peers incentives for sharing cooperation. One approach is to introduce mechanisms for resource allocation that are 'fair', such that a peer's performance improves with his contributions. We find that some intuitive 'fairness' notions may unexpectedly lead to 'unfair' allocations, which do not provide the right incentives for peers. Thus, implementation of P2P systems may want to compromise the degree of 'fairness' in favor of maintaining system robustness and reducing overheads. Optimizing shared vehicle systems (bike-sharing car-sharing ride-sharing) is more challenging compared to traditional resource allocation settings due to the presence of complex network externalities. In particular, changes in the demand supply at any location (via dynamic pricing, rebalancing of empty vehicles, etc.) affect future supply throughout the system within short timescales. Such externalities are well captured by steady-state Markovian models, which are therefore widely used to analyze and design shared vehicle systems. However, using such models to design pricing control policies is computationally difficult since the resulting optimization problems are high-dimensional and non-convex. To this end, we develop a general approximation framework for designing pricing policies in shared vehicle systems, based on a novel convex relaxation which we term elevated flow relaxation. Our approach provides the first efficient algorithms with rigorous approximation guarantees for a wide range of objective functions (throughput, revenue, welfare). For any shared vehicle system with @math stations and m vehicles, our framework provides a pricing policy with an approximation ratio of 1+(n-1) m. This guarantee is particularly meaningful when m n, the average number of vehicles per station is large, as is often the case in practice. Further, the simplicity of our approach allows us to extend it to more complex settings. Apart from pricing, shared vehicle systems enable other control levers for modulating demand and supply, e.g. rebalancing empty vehicles, redirecting riders to nearby vehicles, etc. Our approach yields efficient algorithms with the same approximation guarantees for all these problems, and in the process, obtains as special cases several existing heuristics and asymptotic guarantees. We also extend our approach to obtain bi-criterion guarantees in multi-objective settings; we illustrate this with the example of Ramsey pricing. From a technical perspective, our work develops a new approach for obtaining control policies with approximation guarantees in steady-state Markovian models. Our approach can be distilled into the following three-step program: (i) construct an upper bound via a relaxation to the original problem that encodes essential conservation laws of the system, (ii) identify a family of control policies inducing known steady-state distributions that achieve the value of the relaxed solution in an appropriate scaling limit (in our case, state-independent policies in the limit m++), and (iii) characterize the performance loss between the finite system (i.e. fixed m) and the scaling limit. This technique may be of independent interest for other settings. We study a situation where several independent service providers collaborate by complete pooling of their resources and customer streams into a joint service system. These service providers may represent such diverse organizations as hospitals that pool beds or maintenance firms that pool repairmen. We model the service systems as Erlang delay systems M M s queues that face a fixed cost rate per server and homogeneous delay costs for waiting customers. We examine rules to fairly allocate the collective costs of the pooled system amongst the participants by applying concepts from cooperative game theory. We consider both the case where players' numbers of servers are exogenously given and the scenario where any coalition picks an optimal number of servers. By exploiting new analytical properties of the continuous extension of the classic Erlang delay function, we provide sufficient conditions for the games under consideration to possess a core allocation i.e., an allocation that gives no group of players an incentive to split off and form a separate pool and to admit a population monotonic allocation scheme whereby adding extra players does not make anyone worse off. This is not guaranteed in general, as illustrated via examples.