Table 1 Comparison of scheduling mechanisms
From: Channel condition self-clocked packet scheduling scheme for wireless networks
Scheduling algorithms | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
IWFQ | With proper and dynamic weight, guarantees throughput and delay, fairness | In IWFQ, the main difficulty is in adjusting the values of the bounds since it exhibits a trade-off between fairness and delay/throughput guarantees |
CIF-Q | Guarantees throughput and delay, fairness | CIF-Q is a high algorithmic complexity since it needs to keep a record of leading and lagging counters |
SBFA | Achieve long-term fairness | A flow with a good channel state may receive much more service than its promised share |
PFS | Achieve long-term fairness | Cannot guarantee the delay constraint, lower system performance, and resource utilization |
M-LWDF | Meets throughput and delay guarantee with threshold probability | The difficulty is how to find the optimal value of ρ j |
CSCPS | Steady jitter, guarantees throughput and delay, fairness | CSCPS is a high algorithmic complexity since it needs to keep a record of leading and lagging counters |