Talk:Round-robin scheduling

Computing: Networking / Software / CompSci Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as Mid-importance).

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Expand

Someone needs to expand on this

- I completely agree with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.86.119.247 (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Round-robin scheduling results in max-min fairness if the data packets are equally sized, since the data flow that has waited longest time is given scheduling priority"

These two articles should not be merged, they are about two widely different subjects. /Marius —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.108.127.10 (talk) 13:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Q: How come the data flow that has waited the longest time is given scheduling priority if Round-Robin is based on forwarding the following flow if a current serviced flow is absent?

A: Perhaps because of the second clause is wrong. Please rephrase it. "... since all active flows will take turns in a fair manner, independently of how many packets that are in queue in the flow"? Mange01 (talk) 21:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.71.44 (talk) 05:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fairness of round-robin scheduling

It was not immediately clear to me why round-robin scheduling would favor the biggest processes or data packet flows. I eventually figured out that this would only be true in the complete absence of quantum-slicing, or if the quanta were large relative to the size of the processes or data packets, or if the data packet size varied from one job to another. I made edits accordingly. However, it would be good if someone could confirm this, preferably with reference to a source. -AlanUS (talk) 15:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Process scheduling: error on the example

The example provided in the section 'Process Scheduling' as an image is an excelent resource!

However after following the process I found in 'Excute time = 475' a little mistake. P3 cannot be completed at execute time 475 because the quanta ends at 400. Then, by 475 P1 should have been completed and P4 should be in processing state. Jcammmmm (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a good idea to update the diagram 81.26.170.61 (talk) 11:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]