Here is a comparison between the Priority Scheduling and Round Robin (RR) scheduling algorithms in operating systems in tabular form with 15 points of differentiation:
| Feature | Priority Scheduling | Round Robin (RR) |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Selects tasks based on priority | Selects tasks based on time slice |
| Task scheduling | Schedules individual tasks | Schedules individual tasks |
| Task prioritization | Prioritizes tasks based on priority | Prioritizes tasks based on time slice |
| CPU utilization | High CPU utilization possible, but depends on priority levels | High CPU utilization possible with appropriate time slice |
| Latency | Low latency for high priority tasks | Low latency for short time slice |
| Responsiveness | Fast response time for high priority tasks | Fast response time for short time slice |
| Memory requirements | Low memory requirements | Low memory requirements |
| Preemptive or Non-Preemptive | Preemptive | Preemptive |
| Interrupt handling | Handles interrupts | Handles interrupts |
| Context switching | High rate of context switching possible, but depends on priority levels | High rate of context switching with appropriate time slice |
| Task completion | High priority tasks complete quickly | Tasks complete quickly |
| Fairness | Fair to tasks with different priorities | Fair to all tasks with equal time slice |
| Throughput | High throughput possible, but depends on priority levels | High throughput possible with appropriate time slice |
| Starvation | Starvation possible for low priority tasks | No starvation with small enough time slice |
| Aging | Aging mechanism can be used to increase priority of tasks with longer wait time | Aging mechanism not required |
| Performance prediction | Performance prediction can be challenging | Performance prediction is easier with appropriate time slice |
| Overhead | Overhead is low with priority levels that match workload | Overhead is low with appropriate time slice |
| Priority Inversion | Priority inversion can occur with conflicting priorities | Priority inversion not possible |
| Load balancing | Load balancing can be challenging with priority levels | Load balancing is easier with appropriate time slice |
| Real-time applications | Suitable for real-time applications with critical priorities | Suitable for real-time applications with less critical priorities |
| Batch processing | Not suitable for batch processing | Suitable for batch processing with appropriate time slice |
| Multitasking | Suitable for multitasking environments | Suitable for multitasking environments |
Note that the exact behavior and performance of the Priority Scheduling and RR algorithms can vary based on the specific implementation and the workload being scheduled. The choice between the two algorithms depends on the requirements and constraints of the system and the workload being scheduled. Priority Scheduling is more suitable for real-time systems with critical priorities, while RR is more suitable for systems with less critical priorities and batch processing workloads.
