On fast algorithms for two servers
We consider 2-server algorithms with time complexity O(1) per each request. We show that the previously known algorithm BALANCE2 has competitiveness constant not better than 6, and present another algorithm whose competitiveness constant is 4.
KeywordsCompetitive Algorithm Server Prob Dynamic Data Structure Harmonic Algorithm Request Point
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- P.Berman, H.Karloff, G.Tardos, A competitive algorithm for three servers, in Proc. First Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 1990.Google Scholar
- M.Chrobak, H.Karloff, T.Payne, S.Vishwanathan, New results on server problems, in Proc. First Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 1990.Google Scholar
- M.Chrobak, L.Larmore, An optimal on-line algorithm for trees, to appear in SIAM J. Computing.Google Scholar
- M.Chrobak, L.Larmore, A new approach to the server problem, submitted.Google Scholar
- D.Coppersmith, P.G.Doyle, P.Raghavan, M.Snir, Random walks on weighted graphs and applications to on-line algorithms, manuscript.Google Scholar
- S.Irani and R.Rubinfeld, A competitive 2-server algorithm, manuscript.Google Scholar
- M.Manasse, L.A.McGeoch, D.Sleator, Competitive algorithms for server problems, Proc. 20th ACM STOC (1988) 322–333.Google Scholar
- P.Raghavan, M.Snir, Memory versus randomization in on-line algorithms, Proc. ICALP 1989.Google Scholar