skip to main content
10.1145/1693453.1693476acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesppoppConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Scalable communication protocols for dynamic sparse data exchange

Published:09 January 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many large-scale parallel programs follow a bulk synchronous parallel (BSP) structure with distinct computation and communication phases. Although the communication phase in such programs may involve all (or large numbers) of the participating processes, the actual communication operations are usually sparse in nature. As a result, communication phases are typically expressed explicitly using point-to-point communication operations or collective operations. We define the dynamic sparse data-exchange (DSDE) problem and derive bounds in the well known LogGP model. While current approaches work well with static applications, they run into limitations as modern applications grow in scale, and as the problems that are being solved become increasingly irregular and dynamic.

To enable the compact and efficient expression of the communication phase, we develop suitable sparse communication protocols for irregular applications at large scale. We discuss different irregular applications and show the sparsity in the communication for real-world input data. We discuss the time and memory complexity of commonly used protocols for the DSDE problem and develop NBX--a novel fast algorithm with constant memory overhead for solving it. Algorithm NBX improves the runtime of a sparse data-exchange among 8,192 processors on BlueGene/P by a factor of 5.6. In an application study, we show improvements of up to a factor of 28.9 for a parallel breadth first search on 8,192 BlueGene/P processors.

References

  1. L. G. Valiant. A bridging model for parallel computation. Commun. ACM, 33(8):103--111, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. T. Hoefler and J. L. Traeff. Sparse collective operations for MPI. In Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), HIPS Workshop, May 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. R. Das, Y. Hwang, M. Uysal, J. Saltz, and A. Sussman. Applying the chaos/parti library to irregular problems in computational chemistry and computational aerodynamics. In Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS, pages 45--56. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. L. Träff. Implementing the mpi process topology mechanism. In Supercomputing '02: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM/IEEE conference on Supercomputing, pages 1--14, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2002. IEEE Computer Society Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. A. Alexandrov, M. F. Ionescu, K. E. Schauser, and C. Scheiman. LogGP: Incorporating long messages into the LogP model. J. of Par. and Distr. Comp., 44(1):71--79, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. K. M. Chandy and J. Misra. How processes learn. In Proceedings of the fourth annual ACM symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 204--214. ACM, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. I. Cidon, I. Gopal, and S. Kutten. Optimal computation of global sensitive functions in fast networks. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms, pages 185--191, 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. R. M. Karp, A. Sahay, E. E. Santos, and K. E. Schauser. Optimal broadcast and summation in the LogP model. In Proc. of Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pages 142--153, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Bar-Noy and S. Kipnis. Designing broadcasting algorithms in the postal model for message--passing systems. Math. Syst. Theory, 27(5):431--452, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Bar-Noy, S. Kipnis, and B. Schieber. Optimal computation of census functions in the postal model. Discrete Appl. Math., 58(3):213--222, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. G. Iannello. Efficient Algorithms for the Reduce-Scatter Operation in LogGP. IEEE Trans. Par. Distr. Syst., 8(9):970--982, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Bruck, C.-T. Ho, S. Kipnis, E. Upfal, and D. Weathersby. Efficient algorithms for all-to-all communications in multiport message--passing systems. Trans. on Par. and Distrib. Syst., 8(11):1143--1156, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. T. Hoefler, P. Gottschling, and A. Lumsdaine. Leveraging nonblocking collective communication in high-performance applications. In Proc. of the 20th Annual Symp. on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, pages 113--115. ACM, June 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Hoefler and A. Lumsdaine. Overlapping Communication and Computation with High Level Communication Routines. In Proc. of the 8th IEEE Symp. on Cluster Computing and the Grid, pages 572--577, May 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. IBM Blue Gene Team. Overview of the Blue Gene/P project. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 52(1/2), January 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. T. Hoefler, A. Lumsdaine, and W. Rehm. Implementation and Performance Analysis of Non-Blocking Collective Operations for MPI. In Proc. of the 2007 Intl. Conf. on High Perf. Comp., Networking, Storage and Analysis, SC07. IEEE Computer Society/ACM, Nov. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. D. Hengsen, R. Finkel, and U. Manber. Two algorithms for barrier synchronization. Int. J. Parallel Program., 17(1):1--17, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. Kumar et al. The deep computing messaging Framework: Generalized scalable message passing on the BlueGene/P supercomputer. In ICS '08: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international conference on Supercomputing, pages 94--103, New York, NY, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. Bell, D. Bonachea, Y. Cote, J. Duell, P. Hargrove, P. Husbands, C. Iancu, M. Welcome, and K. Yelick. An evaluation of current high-performance networks. In Proc. of the 17th Int. Symp. on Par. and Distr. Proc., page 28.1, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. T. Hoefler, A. Lichei, and W. Rehm. low-overhead LogGP parameter assessment for modern interconnection networks. In Proc. of the 21st IEEE Intl. Par. & Distrib. Proc. Symp., March 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. M. Matsumoto and T. Nishimura. Mersenne twister: A 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudorandom number generator. In ACM Trans. on Modeling and Computer Simulations, pages 3--30, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Lumsdaine, D. Gregor, B. Hendrickson, and J. W. Berry. Challenges in parallel graph processing. Parallel Processing Letters, 17(1):5--20, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. D. A. Bader and K. Madduri. Parallel algorithms for evaluating centrality indices in real-world networks. In Proc. of the 2006 Int. Conf. on Parallel Processing, pages 539--550, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. D. Gregor and A. Lumsdaine. Lifting sequential graph algorithms for distributed-memory parallel computation. SIGPLAN Not., 40(10):423--437, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. P. Erdos and A. Rényi. On random graphs. Publicationes Mathematicae (Debrecen), 6:290--297, 1959.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz. Collective dynamics of "small-world" networks. Nature, 393(6684):440--442, June 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. J. Barnes and P. Hut. A hierarchical O(N log N) force-calculation algorithm. Nature, 324(6096):446--449, December 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. U. Becciani, R. Ansalonib, V. Antonuccio-Delogua, G. Erbaccic, M. Gamberaa, and A. Pagliaro. A parallel tree code for large N-body simulation: Dynamic load balance and data distribution on a CRAY T3D system. Comp. Phys. Comm., 106:105--113, October 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. J. K. Salmon. Parallel N log N N-body algorithms and applications to astrophysics. Compcon Spring, (91):73--78, March 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. T. A. Davis. University of Florida sparse matrix collection. Submitted to ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Scalable communication protocols for dynamic sparse data exchange

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        PPoPP '10: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming
        January 2010
        372 pages
        ISBN:9781605588773
        DOI:10.1145/1693453
        • cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices
          ACM SIGPLAN Notices  Volume 45, Issue 5
          PPoPP '10
          May 2010
          346 pages
          ISSN:0362-1340
          EISSN:1558-1160
          DOI:10.1145/1837853
          Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2010 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 9 January 2010

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate230of1,014submissions,23%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader