US4495562A
Expired / Lapsed
US
⏱️ 0.0 years remaining
Job execution multiplicity control method
Assignee: Hitachi Ltd
•
Filing: 1981-06-04
•
Granted: 1985-01-22
•
Expires: 2001-06-04
Abstract
Abstract Herein disclosed is a job execution multiplicity controlling method, in which the used time periods of the central unit and the input/output device of at least one processor, respectively, are periodically measured for the respective jobs being executed in parallel in that processor, in which whether the present workload upon that processor is reasonable or not is judged in accordance with that measurement result, and in which a subsequent new job execution is started in that processor when that workload is lower.
Inventors
- 👤 Eiichi Yamaji
- 👤 Yoshie Ohno
Bibliographic Details
Application Number
—
Jurisdiction
US
Data Source
google_patents
Last Synchronized
2026-10-31 22:07
CPC Classifications
G; G06; G06F; G06F9/00; G06F9/06; G06F9/46; G06F9/50; G06F9/5005; G06F9/5027; G06F9/505; G06F2209/00; G06F2209/50; G06F2209/5022
Claims Analysis
Total Claims: 20
Claim 1
Independent Claim
160 words
A method of controlling multiplicity of job execution in a computer system including at least one processor for executing jobs in parallel, said method comprising steps of: (a) measuring used time periods of a central processing unit and an input/output device of said processor, respectively for respective executed jobs which are being executed in parallel in said processor during a measurement time interval; (b) calculating an average progress rate which represents an average of progress rates of the respective executed jobs at which rates the respective executed jobs are processed by means of the central processing unit and the input/output device during the measurement time interval, said calculation being done from the measured used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device for the respective executed jobs; and (c) comparing the average progress rate with a predetermined limit; and (d) controlling the execution of a new job on said computer system as a function of said comparison.
Claim 2
Independent Claim
160 words
A method of controlling multiplicity of job execution in a computer system including at least one processor for executing jobs in parallel, said method comprising steps of: (a) measuring used time periods of a central processing unit and an input/output device of said processor, respectively for respective executed jobs which are being executed in parallel in said processor during a measurement time interval; (b) calculating an average progress rate which represents an average of progress rates of the respective executed jobs at which rates the respective executed jobs are processed by means of the central processing unit and the input/output device during the measurement time interval, said calculation being done from the measured used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device for the respective executed jobs; and (c) comparing the average progress rate with a predetermined limit; and (d) controlling the execution of a new job on said computer system as a function of said comparison.
Claim 3
Dependent Claim
63 words
A method according to claim 1, further including a step of measuring elapse times for the respective executed jobs during which the respective jobs are in an executed state, wherein the calculation of the average progress rate is based upon the measured used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device and the measured elapse time for the respective jobs.
Claim 4
Dependent Claim
40 words
A method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the measurement of the used time period, the measurement of the elapse time, the calculation of the average progress rate and the determination are based on a common measurement time interval.
Claim 5
Dependent Claim
54 words
A method according to claim 2, wherein a progress rate of a job i is determined by the equation: ##EQU4## wherein CPUi and IOi are respectively measured used time periods for the job i of the central procressing unit add the input/output device, and ESTIMEi is the measured elapse time for the job i.
Claim 6
Dependent Claim
54 words
A method according to claim 3, wherein a progress rate of a job i is determined by the equation: ##EQU5## wherein CPUi and IOi are respectively measured used time periods for the job i of the central progressing unit and the input/output device, and ESTIMEi is the measured elapse time for the job i.
Claim 7
Dependent Claim
45 words
A method according to claim 5, wherein the average progress rate is determined by the equation: ##EQU6## wherein both summations are carried out with jobs executed during the measurement time interval and wherein N is the multiplicity of job execution for the measurement time interval.
Claim 8
Dependent Claim
45 words
A method according to claim 5, wherein the average progress rate is determined by the equation: ##EQU7## wherein both summations are carried out with jobs executed during the measurement time interval and wherein N is the multiplicity of job execution for the measurement time interval.
Claim 9
Dependent Claim
35 words
A method according to claim 5, wherein a job which ends during the measurement time interval is excluded from both summations, and a job which starts during the measurement interval is included in both summations.
Claim 10
Dependent Claim
34 words
A method according to claim 6, wherein a job which ends during the measurement interval is excluded from both summations, and a job which starts during the measurement interval is included in both summations.
Claim 11
Dependent Claim
35 words
A method according to claim 2, wherein a time period during which a job is swapped out because it is in a long time wait state is excluded from the elapse time of the job.
Claim 12
Dependent Claim
34 words
A method according to claim 2, wherein a time period during which a job is swapped out because it is in a terminal wait state is excluded from the elapse time of the job.
Claim 13
Dependent Claim
119 words
A method according to claim 1, wherein the determination if a new job is allowed to be executed is performed in such a manner that a new job is allowed to be executed in parallel to jobs which are already being executed if the average progress rate is greater than a predetermined upper limit, that a new job is not allowed to be executed even when one of jobs which are already being executed ends if the average progress rate is lower than a predetermined lower limit, and that a new job is allowed to be executed when one of jobs which are already being executed ends if the average progress rate is between the lower and upper limits.
Claim 14
Dependent Claim
47 words
A method according to claim 1, wherein measuring of the used time period of the input/output device for a job comprises the steps of counting a number of executed input/output access instructions issued by the job and multiplying the number with a predetermined average input/output access time.
Claim 15
Dependent Claim
45 words
A method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of measuring a total throughput during the measurement time interval of the processor for all jobs being executed in parallel wherein the determination is done if the total throughput is lower than a predetermined threshold.
Claim 16
Dependent Claim
52 words
A method according to claim 4, wherein the total throughput is determined by the equation: ##EQU8## wherein the summation is carried out with jobs executed during the measurement time interval, and CPUi and IOi are respectively used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device for a job i.
Claim 17
Dependent Claim
34 words
A method according to claim 15, wherein a job which ends during the measurement interval is excluded from the summation, and a job which starts during the measurement interval is included in the summation.
Claim 18
Dependent Claim
41 words
A method according to claim 14, further comprising a step of determining that a new job is allowed to be executed when one of jobs which are being executed in parallel ends, if the total throughput is larger than the threshold.
Claim 19
Independent Claim
156 words
A method of controlling multiplicity of job execution in a computer system including at least one processor for executing jobs in parallel, said method comprising steps of: (a) measuring used time periods of a central processing unit and an input/output device of said processor, respectively for respective executed jobs which are being executed in parallel in said processor during a measurement time interval; (b) calculating an average of progress rates of the respective executed jobs at which rates the instructions of the respected jobs are executed by means of the central processing unit and the input/output device during the measurement time interval, said calculation being done from the measured used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device for the respective executed jobs; (c) comparing the average of progress rates with a predetermined limit; and (d) controlling the execution of a new job on said computer system as a function of said comparison.
Claim 20
Independent Claim
156 words
A method of controlling multiplicity of job execution in a computer system including at least one processor for executing jobs in parallel, said method comprising steps of: (a) measuring used time periods of a central processing unit and an input/output device of said processor, respectively for respective executed jobs which are being executed in parallel in said processor during a measurement time interval; (b) calculating an average of progress rates of the respective executed jobs at which rates the instructions of the respected jobs are executed by means of the central processing unit and the input/output device during the measurement time interval, said calculation being done from the measured used time periods of the central processing unit and the input/output device for the respective executed jobs; (c) comparing the average of progress rates with a predetermined limit; and (d) controlling the execution of a new job on said computer system as a function of said comparison.
References Cited (Backward Citations)
US3426331A
Cited
GB1162457A
Cited
GB1339090A
Cited
GB1408011A
Cited
US4183083A
Cited
GB1412051A
Cited
US3910322A
Cited
US3905023A
Cited
GB1452865A
Cited
US4010452A
Cited
US4126895A
Cited
US4068302A
Cited
US4217636A
Cited
US4371927A
Cited
US4325120A
Cited
USPTO Annuity & Maintenance Windows
| Annuity Stage | Window Opens | Payment Deadline | Surcharge Period Until | Estimated Fee | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.5 Years (Year 4) | 1988-01-22 | 1988-07-23 | 1989-01-22 | $2000.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 7.5 Years (Year 8) | 1992-01-22 | 1992-07-23 | 1993-01-22 | $3760.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 11.5 Years (Year 12) | 1996-01-22 | 1996-07-23 | 1997-01-22 | $7700.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |