Cross-platform performance prediction of parallel applications using partial execution

Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 2005 Supercomputing Conference, SC'05

Volumn 2005, Issue , 2005, Pages

  Yang, Leo T ^a   Ma, Xiaosong ^a,b   Mueller, Frank ^a  

^a North Carolina State University   (United States)

^b OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODE ANALYSIS; CROSS PLATFORM PERFORMANCE TRANSLATION; OBSERVATION BASED PERFORMANCE PREDICTION; PROGRAM MODELING;

CODES (SYMBOLS); COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA REDUCTION;

PARALLEL PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 33845442055     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/SC.2005.20     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. V. Adve and R. Sakellariou. Application representations for multiparadigm performance modeling of large-scale parallel scientific codes. The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 14(4), 2000.
2. B. Armstrong and R. Eigenmann. Performance forecasting: Towards a methodology for characterizing large computational applications. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Processing, August 1998.
3. R. Bagrodia, E. Deeljman, S. Docy, and T. Phan. Performance prediction of large parallel applications using parallel simulations. In Principles Practice of Parallel Programming, 1999.
4. D.H. Bailey and A. Snavely. Performance modeling: Understanding the present and predicting the future. In Euro-Par Conference, August 2005.
5. R Bell and L. John. Improved automatic testcase synthesis for performance model validation. In International Conference on Supercomputing, pages 111-120, June 2005.
6. J. Bourgeois and F. Spies. Performance prediction of an nas benchmark program with chronosmix environment. In Proceedings of the 6th International Euro-Par Conference, 2000.
7. S. Browne, J. Dongarra, N. Garner, K. London, and P. Mucci. A scalable cross-platform infrastructure for application performance tuning using hardware counters. In Proceedings of Supercomputing, 2000.
8. M. Clement and M. Quinn. Automated performance prediction for scalable parallel computing. Parallel Computing, 23(10), 1997.
9. David E. Culler, Richard M. Karp, David A. Patterson, Abhijit Sahay, Klaus E. Schauser, Eunice Santos, Ramesh Subramonian, and Thorsten von Eicken. LogP: Towards a realistic model of parallel computation. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, 1993.
10. W. Dick and M. Heath. Whole system simulation of solid propellant rockets. In Proceedings of the 38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Indianapolis, IN, July 2002.
11. DOE Office of Science. Database and File Systems Working Group Summary, SLAC Data Management Workshop, 2003.
12. E. Duesterwald, C. Cascaval, and S. Dwarkadas. Characterizing and predicting program behavior and its variability. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques, 2003.
13. M. Faerman, A. Su, R. Wolski, and F. Berman. Adaptive performance prediction for distributed data-intensive applications. In Proceedings of Supercomputing, 1999.
14. M. Fahey and J. Candy. GYRO: A 5-d gyrokinetic-maxwell solver. In Proceedings of Supercomputing, 2004.
15. T. Fahringer and H. Zima. A static parameter based performance prediction tool for parallel programs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Supercomputing, 1993.
16. S. Jarvis, D. Spooner, H. Keung, G. Nudd, J. Cao, and S. Saini. Performance prediction and its use in parallel and distributed computing systems. In Proceedings of the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 2003.
17. W. Jones, L. Pang, D. Stanzione, and W. Ligon. Bandwidth-aware co-allocating meta-schedulers for mini-grid architectures. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing, 2004.
18. D. Kerbyson, H. Alme, A. Hoisie, F. Petrini, H. Wasserman, and M. Gittings. Predictive performance and scalability modeling of a large-scale application. In Proceedings of Supercomputing, 2001.
19. D. Kerbyson, A. Hoisie, and H. Wasserman. A comparison between the earth simulator and alphaserver systems using predictive application performance models. In Proceedings of the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 2003.
20. W. Ligon. Research directions in parallel I/O for clusters. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing, 2002.
21. C. Lim, Y. Low, B. Gan, and W. Cai. Implementation lessons of performance prediction tool for parallel conservative simulation. In Proceedings of the 6th International Euro-Par Conference, 2000.
22. W. Liu and M. Huang. EXPERT: expedited simulation exploiting program behavior repetition. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Supercomputing, 2004.
23. X. Ma, M. Winslett, J. Lee, and S. Yu. Improving MPI-IO output performance with active buffering plus threads. In Proceedings of the International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 2003.
24. G. Marin and J. Mellor-Crummey. Cross-architecture performance predictions for scientific applications using parameterized models. In SIGMETRICS, 2004.
25. A. Mu'alem and D. Feitelson. Utilization, predictability, workloads, and user runtime estimates in scheduling the ibm sp2 with backfilling. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 12(6), 2001.
26. R. Reussner and G. Hunzelmann. Achieving performance portability with SKaMPI for high-performance MPI programs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Science, 2001.
27. H. Shan, L. Oliker, and R. Biswas. Job superscheduler architecture and performance in computational grid environments. In Proceedings of Supercomputing '03, 2003.
28. J. Simon and J. Wierum. Accurate performance prediction for massively parallel systems and its applications. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Euro-Par Conference, 1996.
29. C. Smith. Open source metascheduling for virtual organizations with the community scheduler framework (CSF). Technical whitepaper, http://www.platform. com/resources/whitepapers/.
30. W. Smith, I. Foster, and V. Taylor. Predicting application run times using historical information. In Proceedings of IPPS Workshop on Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, 1998.
31. A. Snavely, L. Carrington, N. Wolter, J. Labarta, R. Badia, and A. Purkayastha. A framework for performance modeling and prediction. In Proceedings of Supercomputing, 2002.
32. Supercluster.org. SILVER design specification. http://www.supercluster. org/silver/specoverview.shtml.
33. V. Taylor, X. Wu, and R. Stevens. Prophesy: an infrastructure for performance analysis and modeling of parallel and grid applications. ACM SICMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 30(4), 2003.
34. A. van Gemund. Symbolic performance modeling of parallel systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 14(2), 2003.
35. J. Vetter and F. Mueller. Communication characteristics of large-scale scientific applications for contemporary cluster architectures. Journal, of Parallel Distributed Computing, 63(9):853-865, September 2003.
36. A. Wagner, H. Sreekantaswamy, and S. Chanson. Performance models for the processor farm paradigm. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 8(5), 1997.
37. X. Zhang and Z. Xu. Multiprocessor scalability predictions through detailed program execution analysis. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on Supercomputing, 1995.