Talk:Queueing model

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Looks like this should be merged into queuing theory. Charles Matthews 14:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

It looks like it has been added. (Queueing theory#History and notation) John Reed Riley 02:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The existing content only talks about the general notation. However, explanation of the classic types of queuing models, such as M/M/1 and M/M/n and how they are analysed is probably needed. This, together with a generalised explanation of how models are formed to reflect reality would distinguish it from queueing theory. -- Cameron Dewe 23:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I have now expanded the existing content to a better article. I think that this article could be expanded into a substantial article on its own, so merger into queuing theory may not be appropriate any longer. If anything, the explanation of Kendal notation fits better in this article, now, with only a short mention needed in the queuing theory article. -- Cameron Dewe 23:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Queuing theory vs queuing model

I like the additions to this article and it could become a good article if this keeps up. However, it is mirroring some of queuing theory. How can we best differentiate the two articles. --Richard Clegg 09:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I think, some of the content in queueing theory, especially that about notation, would actually be better in queueing model. I have not touched it yet because it is probably worth its own article and the details in queueing theory are very good. However, I see queueing theory as being the over-arching overview article, that just highlights the key information, with queueing model being a specific sub-article that explains theoretical models of queues in far more detail. This is to avoid too much detail being in the top level article. Next, I see specific sub-articles about each classic queueing model class, such as M/M/1, M/G/1, M/M/1/K, M/M/c, M/M/c/K, M/M/c/K/K, etc. It would then be in each of these articles that the mathematics for each queue model could be explained and derived. It is either that or build a huge single monolithic queueing theory article that doesn't flow, is hard to read and very obscure. -- Cameron Dewe 08:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Good thinking. OK -- I will make a change to the other article. Good work on this by the way. --Richard Clegg 10:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

venkatraman is doing a project using witness a software used for Discrete Event Simulation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.195.140 (talk) 09:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)