{"responseHeader":{"status":0,"QTime":6,"params":{"q":"{!q.op=AND}id:\"103815\"","hl":"true","hl.simple.post":"","hl.fragsize":"5000","fq":"!embargo_tdt:[NOW TO *]","hl.fl":"ocr_t","hl.method":"unified","wt":"json","hl.simple.pre":""}},"response":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"docs":[{"file_name_t":"AD0760546.pdf","thumb_s":"/1a/32/1a322f3c3ddfdb62875152fbca10e9071c702c1a.jpg","oldid_t":"compsci 11928","setname_s":"ir_computersa","restricted_i":0,"format_t":"application/pdf","creator_t":"Mahl, Robert, 1945-","modified_tdt":"2016-10-27T00:00:00Z","file_s":"/23/30/23306d5a704fcc10f680cb484e9b603a10193878.pdf","title_t":"Page 89","ocr_t":"76 assuniptions, the \"turning priorities microschedulincr\" performs poorer than a fixed priori' algorithm with the p..'s well chosen. This re-sult has been checked by simulation, and the following discussion attempts to establish a theoretical justification. Under this new model, if k users compete for some resource, each one will get it during a portion of the time 1/k. Consider resource j. User i will seize it during a period T a..w.. m the worst possible case, the maximum overlap of requests occurs on resource j. Thus, the time spent by user i waiting for resource j ia less than or equal to Z_ min (a .w, T, a.. w. T) k ^ i kT k 1.1 i This points out that if a job k asks for less time on resource j Jiim job i, the maximun time spent by job i waiting for resource j be-cause of job k will be T aKw. If, on the other hand. a. .w.TyWi + £ min ( a^ ^ ( ^^ ^ ) Vife[1,n] j' (w.^ 0) These equations define the attainable domain with turning priorities. Theorem 6; For every point in the attainable do-nain defined by eouations (111-10), there exists a priority system in which this point is attainable according to equations (III-2). Proof: Define this prioritv svstem by: iJ KD i] i k\") k","id":103815,"created_tdt":"2016-10-27T00:00:00Z","parent_i":103852,"_version_":1642982555741323264}]},"highlighting":{"103815":{"ocr_t":[]}}}