nach oben

Erschienen in:

06.01.2020

Performance drop at executing communication-intensive parallel algorithms

verfasst von: José A. Moríñigo, Pablo García-Muller, Antonio J. Rubio-Montero, Antonio Gómez-Iglesias, Norbert Meyer, Rafael Mayo-García

Erschienen in: The Journal of Supercomputing | Ausgabe 9/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This work summarizes the results of a set of executions completed on three fat-tree network supercomputers: Stampede at TACC (USA), Helios at IFERC (Japan) and Eagle at PSNC (Poland). Three MPI-based, communication-intensive scientific applications compiled for CPUs have been executed under weak-scaling tests: the molecular dynamics solver LAMMPS; the finite element-based mini-kernel miniFE of NERSC (USA); and the three-dimensional fast Fourier transform mini-kernel bigFFT of LLNL (USA). The design of the experiments focuses on the sensitivity of the applications to rather different patterns of task location, to assess the impact on the cluster performance. The accomplished weak-scaling tests stress the effect of the MPI-based application mappings (concentrated vs. distributed patterns of MPI tasks over the nodes) on the cluster. Results reveal that highly distributed task patterns may imply a much larger execution time in scale, when several hundreds or thousands of MPI tasks are involved in the experiments. Such a characterization serves users to carry out further, more efficient executions. Also researchers may use these experiments to improve their scalability simulators. In addition, these results are useful from the clusters administration standpoint since tasks mapping has an impact on the cluster throughput.

Vorheriger Artikel A location and time-aware resource searching scheme in mobile P2P ad hoc networks

Nächster Artikel A novel countermeasure technique to protect WSN against denial-of-sleep attacks using firefly and Hopfield neural network (HNN) algorithms

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

TOP500 Supercomputers homepage. http://www.top500.org

Shalf J, Quinlan D, Janssen C (2011) Rethinking hardware–software codesign for exascale systems. Computer 44(11):22–30. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2011.300 CrossRef

Exascale Computing Project (ECP) homepage. https://www.exascaleproject.org

EuroHPC homepage. http://eurohpc.eu

Partnership Research for Advance Computing in Europe. http://www.prace-ri.eu

National Supercomputing Center in Tianjin homepage. http://www.nscc-tj.gov.cn

Post-K Supercomputer. www.fujitsu.com/global/Images/post-k-supercomputer.pdf

Moríñigo JA, García-Muller P, Rubio-Montero AJ, Gómez-Iglesias A, Meyer N, Mayo-García R (2019) Benchmarking LAMMPS: sensitivity to task location under CPU-based weak-scaling. In: High Performance Computing, Proceedings of the 5th Latin American Conference (CARLA 2018), Bucaramanga, Colombia—Communication in Computer and Information Science, vol 979, pp 224–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16205-4_17

Jeannot E, Mercier G, Tessier F (2014) Process placement in multicore clusters: algorithmic issues and practical techniques. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 25(4):993–1002. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPDS.2013.104 CrossRef

10.

Chavarría-Miranda D, Nieplocha J, Tipparaju V (2006) Topology-aware tile mapping for clusters of SMPs. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference On Computing Frontiers, Ischia, Italy. https://doi.org/10.1145/1128022.1128073

11.

Smith B, Bode B (2005) Performance effects of node mappings on the IBM BlueGene machine. In: Euro-Par 2005 Parallel Processing. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3648, pp 1005–1013. https://doi.org/10.1007/11549468_110

12.

Rodrigues ER, Madruga FL, Navaux POA, Panetta J (2009) Multi-core aware process mapping and its impact on communication overhead of parallel applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium Computers and Communications, Sousse, Tunisia, pp 811–817. https://doi.org/10.1109/iscc.2009.5202271

13.

León EA, Karlin I, Moody AT (2016) System noise revisited: enabling application scalability and reproducibility with SMT. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, Chicago, USA, pp 596–607. https://doi.org/10.1109/ipdps.2016.48

14.

Chai L, Gao Q, Panda DK (2007) Understanding the impact of multi-core architecture in cluster computing: a case study with intel dual-core system. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Symposium Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid), Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, pp 471–478. https://doi.org/10.1109/ccgrid.2007.119

15.

Shainer G, Lui P, Liu T, Wilde T, Layton J (2011) The impact of inter-node latency versus intra-node latency on HPC applications. In: Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing and Systems, pp 455–460. https://doi.org/10.2316/p.2011.757-005

16.

Xingfu W, Taylor V (2009) Using processor partitioning to evaluate the performance of MPI, OpenMP and hybrid parallel applications on dual- and quad-core cray XT4 systems. In: Compute the Future. Proceedings of the Cray User Group (CUG 2009), Atlanta, USA

17.

Rodríguez-Pascual M, Moríñigo JA, Mayo-García R (2019) Effect of MPI tasks location on cluster throughput using NAS. Clust Comput 22(4):1187–1198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-018-02898-7 CrossRef

18.

Moríñigo JA, Rodríguez-Pascual M, Mayo-García R Slurm (2016) Configuration impact on benchmarking. In: Slurm User Group Meeting, Athens, Greece. https://slurm.schedmd.com/publications.html

19.

Xingfu W, Taylor V (2007) Processor partitioning: an experimental performance analysis of parallel applications on SMP clusters systems. In: 19th IASTED Conference Parallel Distributed Computing and Systems (PDCS07), Cambridge, USA, pp 13–18

20.

Zhang C, Yuan X (2010) Processor affinity and MPI performance on SMP-CMP clusters. In: IEEE International Symposium Parallel and Distributed Processing, Workshops and PhD forum, Atlanta, USA, pp 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPDPSW.2010.5470774

21.

McKenna G (2007) Performance analysis and optimisation of LAMMPS on XCmaster, HPCx and BlueGene. University of Edinburgh, EPCC, Edinburgh

22.

Liu J (2010) LAMMPS on advanced SGI architectures. White paper SGI

23.

León EA, Rosenthal E (2014) Characterizing applications sensitivity to network performance. In: Supercomputing Conference (SC’14), Poster, New Orleans, USA

24.

León EA, Karlin I, Bhatele A, Langer SH, Chambreau C, Howell LH, D’Hooge T, Leininger ML (2016) Characterizing parallel scientific applications on commodity clusters: an empirical study of a tapered fat-tree. In: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC’16), Salt Lake City, USA

25.

Jain N, Bhatele A, Howell LH, Böhme D, Karlin I, León EA, Mubarak M, Wolfe N, Gamblin T, Leininger ML (2017) Predicting the performance impact of different fat-tree configurations. In: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC’17), Denver, USA, pp 50:1–50:13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3126908.3126967

26.

Choi DJ, Lockwood G, Sinkovits RS, Tatineni M (2014) Performance of applications using dual-rail InfiniBand 3D torus network on the gordon supercomputer. In: Conference on Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE’14), Atlanta, GA, USA, pp 43:1–43:6. https://doi.org/10.1145/2616498.2616541

27.

Cornebize T, Heinrich F, Legrand A, Vienne J (2017) Emulating high performance linpack on a commodity server at the scale of a supercomputer, HAL-id: hal-01654804

28.

Ferreira K, Grant RE, Levenhagen MJ, Levy S, Groves T (2019) Hardware MPI message matching behaviour to inform design, corrurrency and computation. Pract Exp. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.5150 CrossRef

29.

Pollard SA, Jain N, Herbein S, Bhatele A (2018) Evaluation of an interference-free node allocation policy on fat-tree clusters. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC’18), Dallas, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/SC.2018.00029

30.

León EA, Chambreau C, Leininger ML (2017) What do scientific applications need? An empirical study of multirail network bandwidth. In: 7th International Conference on Advanced Communications and Computations (INFOCOMP 2017), Venice, Italy, pp 35–39

31.

Dang HV, Snir M, Gropp W(2016) Towards millions of communicating threads. In: Proceedings of the 23nd European MPI Users’ Group Meeting (EuroMPI 2016), Edinburgh, UK, pp 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2966884.2966914

32.

Radulovic M, Asifuzzaman K, Carpenter P, Radojkovic P, Ayguadé E (2018) HPC benchmarking: scaling right and looking beyond the average. In: Proceedings of the 24th International European Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing (EuroPAR 2018), LNCS, vol 11014, pp 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96983-1_10

33.

Stampede supercomputer. https://www.tacc.utexas.edu/systems/stampede

34.

Helios supercomputer. http://www.iferc.org/CSC_Scope.html#Systems

35.

Eagle supercomputer. https://wiki.man.poznan.pl/hpc/index.php?title=Eagle

36.

Taffet P, Rao S, León EA, Karlin I (2019) Testing the limits of tapered fat tree networks. In: IEEE/ACM Performance Modeling, Benchmarking and Simulation of High Performance Computer Systems (PMBS), Denver, USA, pp 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1109/PMBS49563.2019.00011

37.

LAMMPS homepage. https://lammps.sandia.gov/bench.html#rhodo

38.

Brooks BR, Brooks CL III, Mackerell AD Jr, Nilsson L, Petrella RJ et al (2009) CHARMM: the biomolecular simulation program. J Comput Chem 30(10):1545–1614. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.21287 CrossRef

39.

Plimpton S (1995) Fast parallel algorithms for short-range molecular dynamics. J Comput Phys 117(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1995.1039 CrossRefMATH

40.

Brown WM, Kohlmeyer A, Plimpton SJ, Tharrington AN (2012) Implementing molecular dynamics on hybrid high performance computers—particle–particle particle-mesh. Comput Phys Commun 183(3):449–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2011.10.012 CrossRef

41.

Lin PT, Heroux MA, Barrett RF, Williams AB (2015) Assessing a mini-application as performance proxy for a finite element method engineering application. Concurr Comput 27(17):5374–5389. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3587 CrossRef

42.

Richards DF, Glosli JN, Chan B, Dorr MR, Draeger EW et al (2009) Beyond homogeneous decomposition: scaling long-range forces on massively parallel systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on High Performance Computing Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC’09), art. nº 60. Portland, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/1654059.1654121

43.

Fast Fourier Transform of the West homepage. http://www.fftw.org

44.

Plimpton S, Pollock R, Stevens M (1997) Particle-mesh Ewald and rRESPA for parallel molecular dynamics simulations. In: SIAM 8th Conference on Parallel Processing for Scientific Computing

45.

Bhatia H, Jain N, Bhatele A, Livnat Y, Domke J, Pascucci V, Bremer P (2018) Interactive investigation of traffic congestion on fat-tree networks using TreeScope. Comput Graph Forum 37:561–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.13442 CrossRef

46.

Qiao P, Wang X, Yang X, Fan Y, Lan Z (2017) Preliminary interference study about job placement and routing algorithms in the fat-tree topology for HPC applications. In: IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (CLUSTER), Honolulu, USA, pp 641–642. https://doi.org/10.1109/CLUSTER.2017.90

Titel: Performance drop at executing communication-intensive parallel algorithms
verfasst von: José A. Moríñigo
Pablo García-Muller
Antonio J. Rubio-Montero
Antonio Gómez-Iglesias
Norbert Meyer
Rafael Mayo-García
Publikationsdatum: 06.01.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: The Journal of Supercomputing / Ausgabe 9/2020
Print ISSN: 0920-8542
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0484
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-019-03142-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2020

Deployment techniques in wireless sensor networks: a survey, classification, challenges, and future research issues

Using improved gradient-boosted decision tree algorithm based on Kalman filter (GBDT-KF) in time series prediction

An efficient scheduling optimization strategy for improving consistency maintenance in edge cloud environment

Effect of garbage collection in iterative algorithms on Spark: an experimental analysis

A novel and efficient classifier using spiking neural network

NIASHPT: a novel intelligent agent-based strategy using hello packet table (HPT) function for trust Internet of Things