DOCSLIB.ORG

An Efficient Programming Model for Memory-Intensive Recursive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Efficient Programming Model for Memory-Intensive Recursive An Efficient Programming Model for Memory-Intensive Recursive Algorithms using Parallel Disks Vlad Slavici†∗, Daniel Kunkle‡, Gene Cooperman†*, Stephen Linton♯ † Northeastern University, Boston, MA ‡ Google Inc., New York ♯ University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Scotland [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT 1 Introduction In order to keep up with the demand for solutions to prob- In the past 10 years, migrating traditional single-CPU lems with ever-increasing data sets, both academia and in- computations to clusters or supercomputers has become im- dustry have embraced commodity computer clusters with lo- portant, as developers are faced with the task of providing cally attached disks or SANs as an inexpensive alternative to solutions to problems handling increasingly larger data sets. supercomputers. With the advent of tools for parallel disks The expense of supercomputers precludes their wider use. programming, such as MapReduce, STXXL and Roomy — Hence, the majority of academic and commercial institu- that allow the developer to focus on higher-level algorithms tions have embraced commodity computer clusters as a less — the programmer productivity for memory-intensive pro- expensive alternative, albeit with less RAM than supercom- grams has increased many-fold. However, such parallel tools puters. were primarily targeted at iterative programs. To get the most benefit out of the use of commodity clus- We propose a programming model for migrating recur- ters, developers need to use the aggregate disks of the cluster sive RAM-based legacy algorithms to parallel disks. Many in order to solve as large problems as possible. A typical 32- memory-intensive symbolic algebra algorithms are most eas- node commodity cluster might have an aggregate of 32 ter- ily expressed as recursive algorithms. In this case, the pro- abytes of disk, compared to an aggregate of only 512 GB of gramming challenge is multiplied, since the developer must RAM, which is a consequence of disk being two orders of re-structure such an algorithm with two criteria in mind: magnitude less expensive than RAM. converting a naturally recursive algorithm into an iterative However, the modern out-of-core program developer still algorithm, while simultaneously exposing any potential data has a challenging task ahead: migrating traditional, RAM- parallelism (as needed for parallel disks). based algorithms from the CPU to external memory on a This model alleviates the large effort going into the de- per-algorithm/per-problem basis. This work addresses that sign phase of an external memory algorithm. Research in challenge by introducing a general programming model and this area over the past 10 years has focused on per-problem a method of migrating traditional recursive RAM-based al- solutions, without providing much insight into the connec- gorithms to external memory programming. tion between legacy algorithms and out-of-core algorithms. Research Contributions There are two main research con- Our method shows how legacy algorithms employing recur- tributions in this paper. sion and non-streaming memory access can be more easily translated into efficient parallel disk-based algorithms. • A general programming model and method for migrat- ing recursive algorithms to parallel disk-based comput- We demonstrate the ideas on a largest computation of ing its kind: the determinization via subset construction and • A general method of migrating random-acess (that is minimization of very large nondeterministic finite set au- at the heart of most RAM-based algorithms for sequen- tomata (NFA). To our knowledge, this is the largest subset tial programming) to parallel streaming access construction reported in the literature. Determinization for Although there already exist many papers (e.g. see [27, large NFA has long been a large computational hurdle in 28] and their citations) written on a variety of parallel disk- the study of permutation classes defined by token passing based algorithms, the algorithms they describe appear quite networks. The programming model was used to design and different from their RAM-based counterparts, and seem to implement an efficient NFA determinization algorithm that mostly cater to the expert, i.e. the researcher already fa- solves the next stage in analyzing token passing networks miliar with parallel disk-based computing. Moreover, these representing two stacks in series. already existing algorithms are providing little insight on ∗ how to tackle future problems not already described. The This work was partially supported by the National Science research presented here attempts to alleviate these obsta- Foundation under Grant CCF 0916133. cles, by providing a general theory of migrating recursive RAM-based algorithms to parallel disks. There exist a number of tools for parallel disks program- ming — such as MapReduce [12], Roomy [17] or STXXL [7] — which allow the developer to focus primarily on the algo- Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for rithm, while the runtime library takes care of the underlying personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are details, such as working with the filesystem and sending data not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, to over the network. While all these tools increase productiv- republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific ity, they do not address the design task of transforming a permission and/or a fee. RAM-based algorithm into a parallel disk-based one. Copyright 200X ACM X-XXXXX-XX-X/XX/XX ...$10.00. We propose a programming model that is independent ity of the programming model. of the programming language/extension used. Unlike pre- In the rest of this paper, Section 2 presents the gen- vious approaches, which focused on a single programming eral programming model and method for migrating recursive language (MapReduce, STXXL, HaLoop [10]), the proposed RAM-based algorithms to parallel disk-based algorithms, to- programming model can be implemented on top of many gether with a discussion on how this method fits with tools tools for parallel disk-based computing, as described in Sec- such as Roomy, MapReduce and STXXL. Section 3 illus- tion 2.2. trates how the theoretical method is applied in practice by As validation of this programming model, we implement looking at the well-know recursive legacy algorithm for con- examples in C, using the Roomy extension library. Roomy verting a non-deterministic finite automaton (NFA) to a de- was chosen because it provides a broad range of primitive terministic finite automaton (DFA) via subset construction, data structures including bit arrays, hash tables, unordered followed by minimizing the DFA. The NFA to minimal DFA sets (RoomyList), and other data structures important for software is then validated experimentally by running it on symbolic algebra. For particular programs, there exist ex- very large inputs obtained from an application in the field tensions of the map-reduce platform (HaLoop [10], Pregel [21], of Token Passing Networks [4]. Section 4 presents a par- and others) that are also general enough to serve as an imple- allel disk-based implementation of the Knapsack problem. mentation platform for the proposed programming model. Section 5 presents related work. The programming model tries to be agnostic about the choice of implementation platform. 2 A General Method for The ideas of this model were motivated by the particular Migrating Recursive Algorithms needs for recursion in symbolic algebra. An important part of many symbolic computations is work- from the CPU to Parallel Disks ing with very large graph-like data structures, that only fit A recursive algorithm starts out with the initial problem, on parallel disks: groups [25], binary decision diagrams [19] and it generates sub-problems whose results are used to solve and others. Very large finite state automata are useful in the initial, larger problem. The generated sub-problems many areas, within symbolic computations and outside of form a callgraph, which is a directed acyclic graph (DAG). it, as discussed in Section 3. The graph has an initial node, called the root, which de- When working with the above mentioned large graph-like scribes the problem (the level 0 sub-problem), and the edges data structures, techniques similar to dynamic programming point from a sub-problem to the smaller sub-problems it de- are often employed (for example, see [19, 25]). Migrating pends upon. dynamic programming to parallel disks is described in Sec- For migrating such a traditional recursive algorithm to tion 2.1 and in our parallel disk-based implementation of the parallel disks, we propose a general method based on travers- 0-1 Knapsack problem in Section 4. ing the problem callgraph. n In the next few paragraphs we discuss possible applica- Figure 1a presents the callgraph of a simple k compu- tions in symbolic computation that are likely to benefit from tation. Here n = 6 and k = 3. Even though there exists a n ` ´ the programming model proposed in this paper. simple formula for k , for the sake of explaining how the method works calculating C(n, k) = n is here done by ` ´ k Possible Applications in Symbolic Computations In com- recursion: putational group theory, a hugely important example is the ` ´ n−1 n−1 , n > , k > matrix recognition project. The matrix recognition project k + k−1 0 0 uses Aschbacher’s classification of the subgroups of the gen- 8 `n =´ n,n` > ´0 eral linear group into 9 categories [3]. For each of the non- n > 1 simple classes, the project provides an algorithm to identify C(n, k) = = > k > n ! > ` ´ , n > a normal subgroup. The matrix recognition algorithm then <> 0 = 1 0 recursively calls itself to identify both the normal subgroup `n´ and the quotient of the original group over the given nor- > = 1, n > 0 > n mal subgroup.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 Algorithm Analysis
    Chapter 4 Algorithm Analysis In this chapter we look at how to analyze the cost of algorithms in a way that is useful for comparing algorithms to determine which is likely to be better, at least for large input sizes, but is abstract enough that we don’t have to look at minute details of compilers and machine architectures. There are a several parts of such analysis. Firstly we need to abstract the cost from details of the compiler or machine. Secondly we have to decide on a concrete model that allows us to formally define the cost of an algorithm. Since we are interested in parallel algorithms, the model needs to consider parallelism. Thirdly we need to understand how to analyze costs in this model. These are the topics of this chapter. 4.1 Abstracting Costs When we analyze the cost of an algorithm formally, we need to be reasonably precise about the model we are performing the analysis in. Question 4.1. How precise should this model be? For example, would it help to know the exact running time for each instruction? The model can be arbitrarily precise but it is often helpful to abstract away from some details such as the exact running time of each (kind of) instruction. For example, the model can posit that each instruction takes a single step (unit of time) whether it is an addition, a division, or a memory access operation. Some more advanced models, which we will not consider in this class, separate between different classes of instructions, for example, a model may require analyzing separately calculation (e.g., addition or a multiplication) and communication (e.g., memory read).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Parallel Computing, 2Nd Edition
    732A54 Traditional Use of Parallel Computing: Big Data Analytics Large-Scale HPC Applications n High Performance Computing (HPC) l Much computational work (in FLOPs, floatingpoint operations) l Often, large data sets Introduction to l E.g. climate simulations, particle physics, engineering, sequence Parallel Computing matching or proteine docking in bioinformatics, … n Single-CPU computers and even today’s multicore processors cannot provide such massive computation power Christoph Kessler n Aggregate LOTS of computers à Clusters IDA, Linköping University l Need scalable parallel algorithms l Need to exploit multiple levels of parallelism Christoph Kessler, IDA, Linköpings universitet. C. Kessler, IDA, Linköpings universitet. NSC Triolith2 More Recent Use of Parallel Computing: HPC vs Big-Data Computing Big-Data Analytics Applications n Big Data Analytics n Both need parallel computing n Same kind of hardware – Clusters of (multicore) servers l Data access intensive (disk I/O, memory accesses) n Same OS family (Linux) 4Typically, very large data sets (GB … TB … PB … EB …) n Different programming models, languages, and tools l Also some computational work for combining/aggregating data l E.g. data center applications, business analytics, click stream HPC application Big-Data application analysis, scientific data analysis, machine learning, … HPC prog. languages: Big-Data prog. languages: l Soft real-time requirements on interactive querys Fortran, C/C++ (Python) Java, Scala, Python, … Programming models: Programming models: n Single-CPU and multicore processors cannot MPI, OpenMP, … MapReduce, Spark, … provide such massive computation power and I/O bandwidth+capacity Scientific computing Big-data storage/access: libraries: BLAS, … HDFS, … n Aggregate LOTS of computers à Clusters OS: Linux OS: Linux l Need scalable parallel algorithms HW: Cluster HW: Cluster l Need to exploit multiple levels of parallelism l Fault tolerance à Let us start with the common basis: Parallel computer architecture C.
    [Show full text]
  • Oblivious Network RAM and Leveraging Parallelism to Achieve Obliviousness
    Oblivious Network RAM and Leveraging Parallelism to Achieve Obliviousness Dana Dachman-Soled1,3 ∗ Chang Liu2 y Charalampos Papamanthou1,3 z Elaine Shi4 x Uzi Vishkin1,3 { 1: University of Maryland, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 2: University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science 3: University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS) 4: Cornell University January 12, 2017 Abstract Oblivious RAM (ORAM) is a cryptographic primitive that allows a trusted CPU to securely access untrusted memory, such that the access patterns reveal nothing about sensitive data. ORAM is known to have broad applications in secure processor design and secure multi-party computation for big data. Unfortunately, due to a logarithmic lower bound by Goldreich and Ostrovsky (Journal of the ACM, '96), ORAM is bound to incur a moderate cost in practice. In particular, with the latest developments in ORAM constructions, we are quickly approaching this limit, and the room for performance improvement is small. In this paper, we consider new models of computation in which the cost of obliviousness can be fundamentally reduced in comparison with the standard ORAM model. We propose the Oblivious Network RAM model of computation, where a CPU communicates with multiple memory banks, such that the adversary observes only which bank the CPU is communicating with, but not the address offset within each memory bank. In other words, obliviousness within each bank comes for free|either because the architecture prevents a malicious party from ob- serving the address accessed within a bank, or because another solution is used to obfuscate memory accesses within each bank|and hence we only need to obfuscate communication pat- terns between the CPU and the memory banks.
    [Show full text]
  • An External-Memory Work-Depth Model and Its Applications to Massively Parallel Join Algorithms
    An External-Memory Work-Depth Model and Its Applications to Massively Parallel Join Algorithms Xiao Hu Ke Yi Paraschos Koutris Hong Kong University of Science and Technology University of Wisconsin-Madison (xhuam,yike)@cse.ust.hk [email protected] ABSTRACT available. This allows us to better focus on the inherent parallel The PRAM is a fundamental model in parallel computing, but it is complexity of the algorithm. On the other hand, given a particular p, seldom directly used in parallel algorithm design. Instead, work- an algorithm with work W and depth d can be optimally simulated depth models have enjoyed much more popularity, as they relieve on the PRAM in O¹d + W /pº steps [11–13]. Thirdly, work-depth algorithm designers and programmers from worrying about how models are syntactically similar to many programming languages various tasks should be assigned to each of the processors. Mean- supporting parallel computing, so algorithms designed in these while, they also make it easy to study the fundamental parallel models can be more easily implemented in practice. complexity of the algorithm, namely work and depth, which are The PRAM can be considered as a fine-grained parallel model, irrelevant to the number of processors available. where in each step, each processor carries out one unit of work. The massively parallel computation (MPC) model, which is a However, today’s massively parallel systems, such as MapReduce simplified version of the BSP model, has drawn a strong interest and Spark, are better captured by a coarse-grained model. The first in recent years, due to the widespread popularity of many big data coarse-grained parallel model is the bulk synchronous parallel (BSP) systems based on such a model.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Parallel Computing
    732A54 / TDDE31 Big Data Analytics Introduction to Parallel Computing Christoph Kessler IDA, Linköping University Christoph Kessler, IDA, Linköpings universitet. Traditional Use of Parallel Computing: Large-Scale HPC Applications High Performance Computing (HPC) Much computational work (in FLOPs, floatingpoint operations) Often, large data sets E.g. climate simulations, particle physics, engineering, sequence matching or proteine docking in bioinformatics, … Single-CPU computers and even today’s multicore processors cannot provide such massive computation power Aggregate LOTS of computers → Clusters Need scalable parallel algorithms Need exploit multiple levels of parallelism C. Kessler, IDA, Linköpings universitet. NSC Tetralith2 More Recent Use of Parallel Computing: Big-Data Analytics Applications Big Data Analytics Data access intensive (disk I/O, memory accesses) Typically, very large data sets (GB … TB … PB … EB …) Also some computational work for combining/aggregating data E.g. data center applications, business analytics, click stream analysis, scientific data analysis, machine learning, … Soft real-time requirements on interactive querys Single-CPU and multicore processors cannot provide such massive computation power and I/O bandwidth+capacity Aggregate LOTS of computers → Clusters Need scalable parallel algorithms Need exploit multiple levels of parallelism Fault tolerance C. Kessler, IDA, Linköpings universitet. NSC Tetralith3 HPC vs Big-Data Computing Both need parallel computing Same kind of hardware – Clusters of (multicore) servers Same OS family (Linux) Different programming models, languages, and tools HPC application Big-Data application HPC prog. languages: Big-Data prog. languages: Fortran, C/C++ (Python) Java, Scala, Python, … Par. programming models: Par. programming models: MPI, OpenMP, … MapReduce, Spark, … Scientific computing Big-data storage/access: libraries: BLAS, … HDFS, … OS: Linux OS: Linux HW: Cluster HW: Cluster → Let us start with the common basis: Parallel computer architecture C.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel Functional Arrays
    Parallel Functional Arrays Ananya Kumar Guy E. Blelloch Robert Harper Carnegie Mellon University, USA Carnegie Mellon University, USA Carnegie Mellon University, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract ment with logarithmic time accesses and updates using balanced The goal of this paper is to develop a form of functional arrays trees, but it seems that getting both accesses and updates in con- (sequences) that are as efficient as imperative arrays, can be used stant time cannot be achieved without some form of language ex- in parallel, and have well defined cost-semantics. The key idea is tension. This means that algorithms for many fundamental prob- to consider sequences with functional value semantics but non- lems are a logarithmic factor slower in functional languages than in functional cost semantics. Because the value semantics is func- imperative languages. This includes algorithms for basic problems tional, “updating” a sequence returns a new sequence. We allow such as generating a random permutation, and for many important operations on “older” sequences (called interior sequences) to be graph problems (e.g., shortest-unweighted-paths, connected com- more expensive than operations on the “most recent” sequences ponents, biconnected components, topological sort, and cycle de- (called leaf sequences). tection). Simple algorithms for these problems take linear time in We embed sequences in a language supporting fork-join paral- the imperative setting, but an additional logarithmic factor in time lelism. Due to the parallelism, operations can be interleaved non- in the functional setting, at least without extensions. deterministically, and, in conjunction with the different cost for in- A variety of approaches have been suggested to alleviate this terior and leaf sequences, this can lead to non-deterministic costs problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Oblivious Parallel RAM and Applications
    Oblivious Parallel RAM and Applications 1? 2?? 3??? Elette Boyle , Kai-Min Chung , and Rafael Pass y 1 IDC Herzliya, [email protected] 2 Academica Sinica, [email protected] 3 Cornell University, [email protected] Abstract. We initiate the study of cryptography for parallel RAM (PRAM) programs. The PRAM model captures modern multi-core architectures and cluster computing models, where several processors execute in par- allel and make accesses to shared memory, and provides the \best of both" circuit and RAM models, supporting both cheap random access and parallelism. We propose and attain the notion of Oblivious PRAM. We present a compiler taking any PRAM into one whose distribution of memory ac- cesses is statistically independent of the data (with negligible error), while only incurring a polylogarithmic slowdown (in both total and par- allel complexity). We discuss applications of such a compiler, building upon recent advances relying on Oblivious (sequential) RAM (Goldreich Ostrovsky JACM'12). In particular, we demonstrate the construction of a garbled PRAM compiler based on an OPRAM compiler and secure identity-based encryption. 1 Introduction Completeness results in cryptography provide general transformations from arbitrary functionalities described in a particular computational model, to solutions for executing the functionality securely within a de- sired adversarial model. Classic results, stemming from [Yao82,GMW87], ? The research of the first author has received funding from the European Union's Tenth Framework Programme (FP10/ 2010-2016) under grant agreement no. 259426 ERC-CaC, and ISF grant 1709/14. Supported by the ERC under the EU's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) ERC Grant Agreement n.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel Programming
    Parallel Programming SCPD Master Module Emil Slusanschi [email protected] University Politehnica of Bucharest Acknowledgement The material in this course has been adapted from various (cited) authoritative sources by Lawrence Rauchwerger from the Parasol Lab and myself and is used with his approval The presentation has been put together with the help of Dr. Mauro Bianco, Antoniu Pop, Tim Smith and Nathan Thomas from the Parasol Lab at Texas A&M University 1 Grading@PP Activity during lectures – 1 point – Presence in class for the lectures is compulsory but does not insure the point – you have to (try to) participate actively Project work – 5 points – Similar to APP: 3/coding, 1/documentation, 1/presentation, 1/bonus – Topics from subjects related to the PP – Teams of 2-3 people – independent grading – Subject can also be done in the “research” hours – at the end a paper/presentation should emerge Oral exam – 4 points – 5-10 minutes / person – 2-3 subjects from the lecture – Can be replaced by holding a talk during the semester on a topic agreed with me in advance “Your” Feedback Last year’s feedback: – Important because you learn how to present ideas in precise and accurate English – Team work experience is vital – Working on big SW projects is important – Improvements required: Hard rules & deadlines Periodic evaluation of individual effort Learn during the whole year (3 week session) Put emphasis on reading… Individual oral exam 2 Deadlines Choosing the Project: – Soft-deadline 31.10 – Hard-deadline 7.11 Project Status – Agreed at the lab by each team Project Submission – The only Deadline: 4.01.2011 – Project Presentations on 4.01 & 11.01 Project Work Roadmap One page project description (pdf + trac) due 7.11.2010 – Introduction: A one paragraph description of the significance of the application.
    [Show full text]
  • Oblivious Network
    J Cryptol (2019) 32:941–972 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00145-018-9301-4 Oblivious Network RAM and Leveraging Parallelism to Achieve Obliviousness Dana Dachman-Soled Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, USA University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS), College Park, USA [email protected] Chang Liu University of California, Berkeley, USA [email protected] Charalampos Papamanthou Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, USA University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS), College Park, USA [email protected] Elaine Shi Cornell University, Ithaca, USA [email protected] Uzi Vishkin Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, USA University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS), College Park, USA [email protected] Communicated by Alon Rosen. Received 13 December 2016 / Revised 7 May 2018 Online publication 9 August 2018 Abstract. Oblivious RAM (ORAM) is a cryptographic primitive that allows a trusted CPU to securely access untrusted memory, such that the access patterns reveal nothing about sensitive data. ORAM is known to have broad applications in secure processor design and secure multiparty computation for big data. Unfortunately, due to a logarith- mic lower bound by Goldreich and Ostrovsky (J ACM 43(3):431–473, 1996), ORAM is bound to incur a moderate cost in practice. In particular, with the latest developments in ORAM constructions, we are quickly approaching this limit, and the room for perfor- mance improvement is small. In this paper, we consider new models of computation in which the cost of obliviousness can be fundamentally reduced in comparison with the standard ORAM model.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Data Parallel Computing on Multicore Processors
    EFFECTIVE DATA PARALLEL COMPUTING ON MULTICORE PROCESSORS by Jong-Ho Byun A dissertation submitted to the faculty of The University of North Carolina at Charlotte in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical and Computer Engineering Charlotte 2010 Approved by: ______________________________ Dr. Arun Ravindran ______________________________ Dr. Arindam Mukherjee ______________________________ Dr. Bharat Joshi ______________________________ Dr. Gabor Hetyei ii ©2010 Jong-Ho Byun ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iii ABSTRACT JONG-HO BYUN. Effective data parallel computing on multicore processors. (Under direction of DR. ARUN RAVINDRAN) The rise of chip multiprocessing or the integration of multiple general purpose processing cores on a single chip (multicores), has impacted all computing platforms including high performance, servers, desktops, mobile, and embedded processors. Programmers can no longer expect continued increases in software performance without developing parallel, memory hierarchy friendly software that can effectively exploit the chip level multiprocessing paradigm of multicores. The goal of this dissertation is to demonstrate a design process for data parallel problems that starts with a sequential algorithm and ends with a high performance implementation on a multicore platform. Our design process combines theoretical algorithm analysis with practical optimization techniques. Our target multicores are quad-core processors from Intel and the eight-SPE IBM Cell B.E. Target applications include Matrix Multiplications (MM), Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD), LU Decomposition (LUD), and Power Flow Solver based on Gauss-Seidel (PFS-GS) algorithms. These applications are popular computation methods in science and engineering problems and are characterized by unit-stride (MM, LUD, and PFS-GS) or 2-point stencil (FDTD) memory access pattern.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel Computation Models Parallel Computation Models
    Parallel Computation Models • PRAM (parallel RAM) Parallel Computation Models • Fixed Interconnection Network – bus, ring, mesh, hypercube, shuffle-exchange • Boolean Circuits Lecture 3 • Combinatorial Circuits Lecture 4 • BSP • LOGP Slide 1 Slide 2 TYPES OF MULTIPROCESSING FRAMEWORKS PARALLEL DISTRIBUTED PARALLEL AND DISTRIBUTED COMPUTATION TECHNICAL ASPECTS • MANY INTERCONNECTED PROCESSORS WORKING CONCURRENTLY •PARALLEL COMPUTERS (USUALLY) WORK IN TIGHT SYNCRONY, SHARE MEMORY TO A LARGE EXTENT AND HAVE A VERY FAST AND RELIABLE COMMUNICATION MECHANISMBETWEEN THEM. • DISTRIBUTED COMPUTERS ARE MORE INDEPENDENT, COMMUNICATION IS LESS P4 P5 FREQUENT AND LESS SYNCRONOUS, AND THE COOPERATION IS LIMITED. P3 PURPOSES • PARALLEL COMPUTERS COOPERATE TO SOLVE MORE EFFICIENTLY (POSSIBLY) DIFFICULT PROBLEMS INTERCONNECTION NETWORK • DISTRIBUTED COMPUTERS HAVE INDIVIDUAL GOALS AND PRIVATE ACTIVITIES. SOMETIME COMMUNICATIONS WITH OTHER ONES ARE NEEDED. (E. G. DISTRIBUTED DA TA BASE OPERATIONS). P2 PARALLEL COMPUTERS: COOPERATION IN A POSITIVE SENSE P1 . Pn DISTRIBUTED COMPUTERS: COOPERATION IN A NEGATIVE SENSE, ONLY WHEN IT IS NECESSARY • CONNECTION MACHINE • INTERNET Connects all the computers of the world Slide 3 Slide 4 FOR PARALLEL SYSTEMS PARALLEL ALGORITHMS WE ARE INTERESTED TO SOLVE ANY PROBLEM IN PARALLEL • WHICH MODEL OF COMPUTATION IS THE BETTER TO USE? FOR DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS • HOW MUCH TIME WE EXPECT TO SAVE USING A PARALLEL ALGORITHM? WE ARE INTERESTED TO SOLVE IN PARALLEL • HOW TO CONSTRUCT EFFICIENT ALGORITHMS? PARTICULAR PROBLEMS ONLY,
    [Show full text]
  • A Practical Hierarchial Model of Parallel Computation: the Model
    Syracuse University SURFACE Electrical Engineering and Computer Science - Technical Reports College of Engineering and Computer Science 2-1991 A Practical Hierarchial Model of Parallel Computation: The Model Todd Heywood Sanjay Ranka Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/eecs_techreports Part of the Computer Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Heywood, Todd and Ranka, Sanjay, "A Practical Hierarchial Model of Parallel Computation: The Model" (1991). Electrical Engineering and Computer Science - Technical Reports. 123. https://surface.syr.edu/eecs_techreports/123 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Engineering and Computer Science at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science - Technical Reports by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SU-CIS-91-06 A Practical Hierarchial Model of Parallel Computation: The Model Todd Heywood and Sanjay Ranka February 1991 School of Computer and Information Science Suite 4-116 Center for Science and Technology Syracuse, New York 13244-4100 (315) 443-2368 A Practical Hierarchical Model of Parallel Computation: The Model Todd Heywood and Sanjay Ranka School of Computer and Information Science Syracuse University Syracuse, NY 13244 Email: heywoodGtop. cis. syr. edu and rankaOtop. cis. syr. edu February 26, 1991 Abstract We introduce a model of parallel computation that retains the ideal properties of the PRAM by using it as a sub-model, while simultaneously being more reflective of realistic paral­ lel architectures by accounting for and providing abstract control over communication and synchronization costs. The Hierarchical PRAM (H-PRAM) model controls conceptual com­ plexity in the face of asynchrony in two ways.
    [Show full text]