DOCSLIB.ORG

CHABBI-DOCUMENT-2015.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CHABBI-DOCUMENT-2015.Pdf ABSTRACT Software Support for Efficient Use of Modern Computer Architectures by Milind Chabbi Parallelism is ubiquitous in modern computer architectures. Heterogeneity of CPU cores and deep memory hierarchies make modern architectures difficult to program efficiently. Achieving top performance on supercomputers is difficult due to complex hardware, software, and their interactions. Production software systems fail to achieve top performance on modern architectures broadly due to three main causes: resource idleness, parallel overhead,anddata movement overhead.Thisdissertationpresentsnovelande↵ectiveperformance analysis tools, adap- tive runtime systems,andarchitecture-aware algorithms to understand and address these problems. Many future high performance systems will employ traditional multicore CPUs aug- mented with accelerators such as GPUs. One of the biggest concerns for accelerated systems is how to make best use of both CPU and GPU resources. Resource idleness arises in a parallel program due to insufficient parallelism and load imbalance, among other causes. To assess systemic resource idleness arising in GPU-accelerated architectures, we developed efficient profiling and tracing capabilities. We introduce CPU-GPU blame shifting—a novel technique to pinpoint and quantify the causes of resource idleness in GPU-accelerated archi- tectures. Parallel overheads arise due to synchronization constructs such as barriers and locks used in parallel programs. We developed a new technique to identify and eliminate redundant barriers at runtime in Partitioned Global Address Space programs. In addition, we developed a set of novel mutual exclusion algorithms that exploit locality in the memory hierarchy to improve performance on Non-Uniform Memory Access architectures. In modern architectures, inefficient or unnecessary memory accesses can severely degrade program performance. To pinpoint and quantify wasteful memory operations, we developed a fine-grain execution-monitoring framework. We extended this framework and demonstrated the feasibility of attributing fine-grain execution metrics to source and data in their contexts for long running programs—a task previously thought to be infeasible. The solutions described in this dissertation were employed to gain insights into the per- formance of a collection of important programs—both parallel and serial. The insights we gained enabled us to improve the performance of several important programs by a signifi- cant margin. Software for future systems will benefit from the techniques described in this dissertation. Acknowledgments I wish to thank my thesis committee: Prof. John Mellor-Crummey, Prof. Vivek Sarkar, Prof. Peter Varman, and Dr. Costin Iancu. It is exceptionally difficult to acknowledge the help of my advisor Prof. John Mellor- Crummey, which has extended beyond the time I spent at Rice University and beyond the academic realm. Prof. Mellor-Crummey’s paper about the MCS lock, which I read in 2006 during a course under Prof. Greg Andrews at The University of Arizona, sparked my interest in shared-memory synchronization. It was the same year the paper won the prestigious Edsger W. Dijkstra Prize in Distributed Computing. I had my first interaction with Prof. Mellor-Crummey in the Fall of 2008, when I emailed him with my interest in his work. Prof. Mellor-Crummey’s prompt reply and the ongoing PACE project encouraged me to consider Rice seriously. Although I was admitted to Rice in 2009, I could not join that year due to immigration complications. Prof. Mellor-Crummey was patient to wait until I joined Rice in the Fall of 2010. In the months and years that followed, I would only see Prof. Mellor-Crummey’s abilities with awe: how he pulled a reference to a related work in matter of seconds and how he remembered author’s names, paper titles, and processor architectures. Early years of the graduate studies were filled with many “fake eureka” moments, which IwouldsharewithProf.Mellor-Crummey,hewouldpatientlylistentomy“ideas”ofrein- venting the wheel, and respectfully point me to a work in 1990’s that had already solved it, in a better way on many occasions. As the time progressed, some seeds of ideas grew and started showing promise. Over the years Prof. Mellor-Crummey has helped me set higher standards in my research goals and impact. He helped me turn my half-baked ideas into concrete solutions. He would ask me the right set of questions, in search of answers through which I would learn a great deal about my own work, improve my ideas, and know more about the state-of-the-art. In stark contrast with my experience in industry, where doing anything outside the defined boundaries was a taboo, working under Prof. Mellor-Crummey, v there is no research question that is not worth pursuing. I am fortunate to have explored compilers, heterogenous architectures, high performance computing, binary analysis, per- formance analysis, data race detection, model checking, synchronization, computer security, and several other aspects in my graduate career. Having started my graduate career with inspiration from the MCS lock, it was my desire to contribute in that direction. We came close to doing something related to locks multiple times during the last three years: binary analysis for identifying mutual exclusion on one occasion and building efficient reader-writer locks on two occasions. However, we had to give up both because it was too hard to do or already been done very recently. The insight came when Prof. Mellor-Crummey and I were looking at lock contention in NWChem. Prof. Mellor-Crummey came up with the idea of batching requests from the same node when there were local contenders; I was already aware of lock cohorting. After that we both envisioned an MCS lock with multiple levels of hierarchy to take advantage of NUMA machines. Subse- quently, we devised the HMCS lock, showed its superiority both theoretically and empirically. This work has only improved over time with new design for an adaptive HMCS lock and more. I am indebted to Prof. Mellor-Crummey for always holding the bar higher for me to reach newer heights. Beyond research, Prof. Mellor-Crummey has helped me in my presentation skills, con- nected me with several researchers, and helped plan my vacations too. IwouldliketothanktheHPCToolkit research sta↵: Laksono Adhianto, Mark Krentel, and Mike Fagan. Without their constant support this work would not have been possible. IwouldliketocalloutMikeFaganforcollaboratinginmanyofmyprojectsandbeing extremely helpful in paper writing and solving both computer science and mathematical problems. I want to thank my collaborators Costin Iancu, Wim Lavrijsen, and Wibe de Jong from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. I am indebted to Costin for his warmth, connecting me with people, and helping with my job search. I would like to thank Dr. Tracy Volz at Rice University for training me on many occasions for my presentations and providing me with the opportunity to train other students at Rice. This acknowledgement will be incomplete without mentioning the great support form vi the administrative sta↵of the department of computer science at Rice University. I would like to particularly thank Belia Martinez for her warmth and friendliness, which make her the friend of all graduate students. Belia also deserves accolades for helping me with my immigration process. This acknowledgement will be incomplete without mentioning the constant feedback that fellow graduate students provided in my talks, research work, and publications, including this dissertation. Reshmy, Rajesh, Aarthi, Shruti, Priyanka, Deepak, Karthik, Rahul, Gaurav, and Rajoshi, who became my Rice family had a positive role to play. They made my years in Houston at Rice memorable and fun filled. I would like to thank Girish for being a close friend in Houston. Few people would shamelessly eat dinner at a friend’s place as many times as I have eaten in Girish’s house. Alargeroundofthankstomyfather,mother,andbrother.Theyhavestoodwithme through my good and bad times. They have encouraged me to accomplish my dreams, shown confidence in my aspirations, and provided moral, spiritual, and financial support at all times. I would like to thank my wife for her unconditional support in my endeavors. I wish to thank the funding agencies that supported my work: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Texas Instruments, Ken Kennedy Institute for Information Technology, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. I am thankful to the world class computational facilities provided by XSEDE, U.S. DOE laboratories, and Rice University’s Research Computing Support Group, which made this research possible. Specifically, this work is funded in part by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency through AFRL Contract FA8650-09-C-7915, DOE Office of Science under Cooper- ative Agreements DE-FC02-07ER25800, DE-FC02-13ER26144, DE-FC02-12ER26119, DE- SC0008699, and DE-SC0010473, Sandia National Laboratory purchase order 1293383, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory subcontract 7106218. This research used the resources provided by the National Center for Computational Sciences (NCCS) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory supported by the DOE Office of Science under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725, Keeneland Computing Facility at the Georgia vii Institute of Technology supported by the National Science Foundation under Contract OCI- 0910735, Data Analysis and Visualization Cyberinfrastructure funded by NSF under grant OCI-0959097, Blacklight
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Petaflops for the People
    PETAFLOPS SPOTLIGHT: NERSC housands of researchers have used facilities of the Advanced T Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program and its EXTREME-WEATHER Department of Energy (DOE) computing predecessors over the past four decades. Their studies of hurricanes, earthquakes, NUMBER-CRUNCHING green-energy technologies and many other basic and applied Certain problems lend themselves to solution by science problems have, in turn, benefited millions of people. computers. Take hurricanes, for instance: They’re They owe it mainly to the capacity provided by the National too big, too dangerous and perhaps too expensive Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), the Oak to understand fully without a supercomputer. Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) and the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF). Using decades of global climate data in a grid comprised of 25-kilometer squares, researchers in These ASCR installations have helped train the advanced Berkeley Lab’s Computational Research Division scientific workforce of the future. Postdoctoral scientists, captured the formation of hurricanes and typhoons graduate students and early-career researchers have worked and the extreme waves that they generate. Those there, learning to configure the world’s most sophisticated same models, when run at resolutions of about supercomputers for their own various and wide-ranging projects. 100 kilometers, missed the tropical cyclones and Cutting-edge supercomputing, once the purview of a small resulting waves, up to 30 meters high. group of experts, has trickled down to the benefit of thousands of investigators in the broader scientific community. Their findings, published inGeophysical Research Letters, demonstrated the importance of running Today, NERSC, at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; climate models at higher resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • ACM SIGACT News Distributed Computing Column 28
    ACM SIGACT News Distributed Computing Column 28 Idit Keidar Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Technion Haifa, 32000, Israel [email protected] Sergio Rajsbaum, who edited this column for seven years and established it as a relevant and popular venue, is stepping down. This issue is my first step in the big shoes he vacated. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Sergio for providing us with seven years’ worth of interesting columns. In producing these columns, Sergio has enjoyed the support of the community at-large and obtained material from many authors, who greatly contributed to the column’s success. I hope to enjoy a similar level of support; I warmly welcome your feedback and suggestions for material to include in this column! The main two conferences in the area of principles of distributed computing, PODC and DISC, took place this summer. This issue is centered around these conferences, and more broadly, distributed computing research as reflected therein, ranging from reviews of this year’s instantiations, through influential papers in past instantiations, to examining PODC’s place within the realm of computer science. I begin with a short review of PODC’07, and highlight some “hot” trends that have taken root in PODC, as reflected in this year’s program. Some of the forthcoming columns will be dedicated to these up-and- coming research topics. This is followed by a review of this year’s DISC, by Edward (Eddie) Bortnikov. For some perspective on long-running trends in the field, I next include the announcement of this year’s Edsger W.
    [Show full text]
  • Edsger Dijkstra: the Man Who Carried Computer Science on His Shoulders
    INFERENCE / Vol. 5, No. 3 Edsger Dijkstra The Man Who Carried Computer Science on His Shoulders Krzysztof Apt s it turned out, the train I had taken from dsger dijkstra was born in Rotterdam in 1930. Nijmegen to Eindhoven arrived late. To make He described his father, at one time the president matters worse, I was then unable to find the right of the Dutch Chemical Society, as “an excellent Aoffice in the university building. When I eventually arrived Echemist,” and his mother as “a brilliant mathematician for my appointment, I was more than half an hour behind who had no job.”1 In 1948, Dijkstra achieved remarkable schedule. The professor completely ignored my profuse results when he completed secondary school at the famous apologies and proceeded to take a full hour for the meet- Erasmiaans Gymnasium in Rotterdam. His school diploma ing. It was the first time I met Edsger Wybe Dijkstra. shows that he earned the highest possible grade in no less At the time of our meeting in 1975, Dijkstra was 45 than six out of thirteen subjects. He then enrolled at the years old. The most prestigious award in computer sci- University of Leiden to study physics. ence, the ACM Turing Award, had been conferred on In September 1951, Dijkstra’s father suggested he attend him three years earlier. Almost twenty years his junior, I a three-week course on programming in Cambridge. It knew very little about the field—I had only learned what turned out to be an idea with far-reaching consequences. a flowchart was a couple of weeks earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1901.04709V1 [Cs.GT]
    Self-Stabilization Through the Lens of Game Theory Krzysztof R. Apt1,2 and Ehsan Shoja3 1 CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 MIMUW, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland 3 Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran Abstract. In 1974 E.W. Dijkstra introduced the seminal concept of self- stabilization that turned out to be one of the main approaches to fault- tolerant computing. We show here how his three solutions can be for- malized and reasoned about using the concepts of game theory. We also determine the precise number of steps needed to reach self-stabilization in his first solution. 1 Introduction In 1974 Edsger W. Dijkstra introduced in a two-page article [10] the notion of self-stabilization. The paper was completely ignored until 1983, when Leslie Lamport stressed its importance in his invited talk at the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), published a year later as [21]. Things have changed since then. According to Google Scholar Dijkstra’s paper has been by now cited more than 2300 times. It became one of the main ap- proaches to fault tolerant computing. An early survey was published in 1993 as [26], while the research on the subject until 2000 was summarized in the book [13]. In 2002 Dijkstra’s paper won the PODC influential paper award (renamed in 2003 to Dijkstra Prize). The literature on the subject initiated by it continues to grow. There are annual Self-Stabilizing Systems Workshops, the 18th edition of which took part in 2016. The idea proposed by Dijkstra is very simple. Consider a distributed system arXiv:1901.04709v1 [cs.GT] 15 Jan 2019 viewed as a network of machines.
    [Show full text]
  • Distributed Algorithms for Wireless Networks
    A THEORETICAL VIEW OF DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS Nancy Lynch, MIT EECS, CSAIL National Science Foundation, April 1, 2021 Theory for Distributed Systems • We have worked on theory for distributed systems, trying to understand (mathematically) their capabilities and limitations. • This has included: • Defining abstract, mathematical models for problems solved by distributed systems, and for the algorithms used to solve them. • Developing new algorithms. • Producing rigorous proofs, of correctness, performance, fault-tolerance. • Proving impossibility results and lower bounds, expressing inherent limitations of distributed systems for solving problems. • Developing foundations for modeling, analyzing distributed systems. • Kinds of systems: • Distributed data-management systems. • Wired, wireless communication systems. • Biological systems: Insect colonies, developmental biology, brains. This talk: 1. Algorithms for Traditional Distributed Systems 2. Impossibility Results 3. Foundations 4. Algorithms for New Distributed Systems 1. Algorithms for Traditional Distributed Systems • Mutual exclusion in shared-memory systems, resource allocation: Fischer, Burns,…late 70s and early 80s. • Dolev, Lynch, Pinter, Stark, Weihl. Reaching approximate agreement in the presence of faults. JACM,1986. • Lundelius, Lynch. A new fault-tolerant algorithm for clock synchronization. Information and Computation,1988. • Dwork, Lynch, Stockmeyer. Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. JACM,1988. Dijkstra Prize, 2007. 1A. Dwork, Lynch, Stockmeyer [DLS] “This paper introduces a number of practically motivated partial synchrony models that lie between the completely synchronous and the completely asynchronous models and in which consensus is solvable. It gave practitioners the right tool for building fault-tolerant systems and contributed to the understanding that safety can be maintained at all times, despite the impossibility of consensus, and progress is facilitated during periods of stability.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 SIGACT REPORT SIGACT EC – Eric Allender, Shuchi Chawla, Nicole Immorlica, Samir Khuller (Chair), Bobby Kleinberg September 14Th, 2020
    2020 SIGACT REPORT SIGACT EC – Eric Allender, Shuchi Chawla, Nicole Immorlica, Samir Khuller (chair), Bobby Kleinberg September 14th, 2020 SIGACT Mission Statement: The primary mission of ACM SIGACT (Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory) is to foster and promote the discovery and dissemination of high quality research in the domain of theoretical computer science. The field of theoretical computer science is the rigorous study of all computational phenomena - natural, artificial or man-made. This includes the diverse areas of algorithms, data structures, complexity theory, distributed computation, parallel computation, VLSI, machine learning, computational biology, computational geometry, information theory, cryptography, quantum computation, computational number theory and algebra, program semantics and verification, automata theory, and the study of randomness. Work in this field is often distinguished by its emphasis on mathematical technique and rigor. 1. Awards ▪ 2020 Gödel Prize: This was awarded to Robin A. Moser and Gábor Tardos for their paper “A constructive proof of the general Lovász Local Lemma”, Journal of the ACM, Vol 57 (2), 2010. The Lovász Local Lemma (LLL) is a fundamental tool of the probabilistic method. It enables one to show the existence of certain objects even though they occur with exponentially small probability. The original proof was not algorithmic, and subsequent algorithmic versions had significant losses in parameters. This paper provides a simple, powerful algorithmic paradigm that converts almost all known applications of the LLL into randomized algorithms matching the bounds of the existence proof. The paper further gives a derandomized algorithm, a parallel algorithm, and an extension to the “lopsided” LLL.
    [Show full text]
  • Unlocking the Full Potential of the Cray XK7 Accelerator
    Unlocking the Full Potential of the Cray XK7 Accelerator ∗ † Mark D. Klein , and, John E. Stone ∗National Center for Supercomputing Application, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA †Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA Abstract—The Cray XK7 includes NVIDIA GPUs for ac- [2], [3], [4], and for high fidelity movie renderings with the celeration of computing workloads, but the standard XK7 HVR volume rendering software.2 In one example, the total system software inhibits the GPUs from accelerating OpenGL turnaround time for an HVR movie rendering of a trillion- and related graphics-specific functions. We have changed the operating mode of the XK7 GPU firmware, developed a custom cell inertial confinement fusion simulation [5] was reduced X11 stack, and worked with Cray to acquire an alternate driver from an estimate of over a month for data transfer to and package from NVIDIA in order to allow users to render and rendering on a conventional visualization cluster down to post-process their data directly on Blue Waters. Users are able just one day when rendered locally using 128 XK7 nodes to use NVIDIA’s hardware OpenGL implementation which has on Blue Waters. The fully-graphics-enabled GPU state is many features not available in software rasterizers. By elim- inating the transfer of data to external visualization clusters, currently considered an unsupported mode of operation by time-to-solution for users has been improved tremendously. In Cray, and to our knowledge Blue Waters is presently the one case, XK7 OpenGL rendering has cut turnaround time only Cray system currently running in this mode.
    [Show full text]
  • LNCS 4308, Pp
    On Distributed Verification Amos Korman and Shay Kutten Faculty of IE&M, Technion, Haifa 32000, Israel Abstract. This paper describes the invited talk given at the 8th Inter- national Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking (ICDCN 2006), at the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, India. This talk was intended to give a partial survey and to motivate further studies of distributed verification. To serve the purpose of motivating, we allow ourselves to speculate freely on the potential impact of such research. In the context of sequential computing, it is common to assume that the task of verifying a property of an object may be much easier than computing it (consider, for example, solving an NP-Complete problem versus verifying a witness). Extrapolating from the impact the separation of these two notions (computing and verifying) had in the context of se- quential computing, the separation may prove to have a profound impact on the field of distributed computing as well. In addition, in the context of distributed computing, the motivation for the separation seems even stronger than in the centralized sequential case. In this paper we explain some motivations for specific definitions, sur- vey some very related notions and their motivations in the literature, survey some examples for problems and solutions, and mention some ad- ditional general results such as general algorithmic methods and general lower bounds. Since this paper is mostly intended to “give a taste” rather than be a comprehensive survey, we apologize to authors of additional related papers that we did not mention or detailed. 1 Introduction This paper addresses the problem of locally verifying global properties.
    [Show full text]
  • This Is Your Presentation Title
    Introduction to GPU/Parallel Computing Ioannis E. Venetis University of Patras 1 Introduction to GPU/Parallel Computing www.prace-ri.eu Introduction to High Performance Systems 2 Introduction to GPU/Parallel Computing www.prace-ri.eu Wait, what? Aren’t we here to talk about GPUs? And how to program them with CUDA? Yes, but we need to understand their place and their purpose in modern High Performance Systems This will make it clear when it is beneficial to use them 3 Introduction to GPU/Parallel Computing www.prace-ri.eu Top 500 (June 2017) CPU Accel. Rmax Rpeak Power Rank Site System Cores Cores (TFlop/s) (TFlop/s) (kW) National Sunway TaihuLight - Sunway MPP, Supercomputing Center Sunway SW26010 260C 1.45GHz, 1 10.649.600 - 93.014,6 125.435,9 15.371 in Wuxi Sunway China NRCPC National Super Tianhe-2 (MilkyWay-2) - TH-IVB-FEP Computer Center in Cluster, Intel Xeon E5-2692 12C 2 Guangzhou 2.200GHz, TH Express-2, Intel Xeon 3.120.000 2.736.000 33.862,7 54.902,4 17.808 China Phi 31S1P NUDT Swiss National Piz Daint - Cray XC50, Xeon E5- Supercomputing Centre 2690v3 12C 2.6GHz, Aries interconnect 3 361.760 297.920 19.590,0 25.326,3 2.272 (CSCS) , NVIDIA Tesla P100 Cray Inc. DOE/SC/Oak Ridge Titan - Cray XK7 , Opteron 6274 16C National Laboratory 2.200GHz, Cray Gemini interconnect, 4 560.640 261.632 17.590,0 27.112,5 8.209 United States NVIDIA K20x Cray Inc. DOE/NNSA/LLNL Sequoia - BlueGene/Q, Power BQC 5 United States 16C 1.60 GHz, Custom 1.572.864 - 17.173,2 20.132,7 7.890 4 Introduction to GPU/ParallelIBM Computing www.prace-ri.eu How do
    [Show full text]
  • Stabilization
    Chapter 13 Stabilization A large branch of research in distributed computing deals with fault-tolerance. Being able to tolerate a considerable fraction of failing or even maliciously be- having (\Byzantine") nodes while trying to reach consensus (on e.g. the output of a function) among the nodes that work properly is crucial for building reli- able systems. However, consensus protocols require that a majority of the nodes remains non-faulty all the time. Can we design a distributed system that survives transient (short-lived) failures, even if all nodes are temporarily failing? In other words, can we build a distributed system that repairs itself ? 13.1 Self-Stabilization Definition 13.1 (Self-Stabilization). A distributed system is self-stabilizing if, starting from an arbitrary state, it is guaranteed to converge to a legitimate state. If the system is in a legitimate state, it is guaranteed to remain there, provided that no further faults happen. A state is legitimate if the state satisfies the specifications of the distributed system. Remarks: • What kind of transient failures can we tolerate? An adversary can crash nodes, or make nodes behave Byzantine. Indeed, temporarily an adversary can do harm in even worse ways, e.g. by corrupting the volatile memory of a node (without the node noticing { not unlike the movie Memento), or by corrupting messages on the fly (without anybody noticing). However, as all failures are transient, eventually all nodes must work correctly again, that is, crashed nodes get res- urrected, Byzantine nodes stop being malicious, messages are being delivered reliably, and the memory of the nodes is secure.
    [Show full text]
  • Hardware Complexity and Software Challenges
    Trends in HPC: hardware complexity and software challenges Mike Giles Oxford University Mathematical Institute Oxford e-Research Centre ACCU talk, Oxford June 30, 2015 Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 1 / 29 1 { 10? 10 { 100? 100 { 1000? Answer: 4 cores in Intel Core i7 CPU + 384 cores in NVIDIA K1100M GPU! Peak power consumption: 45W for CPU + 45W for GPU Question ?! How many cores in my Dell M3800 laptop? Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 2 / 29 Answer: 4 cores in Intel Core i7 CPU + 384 cores in NVIDIA K1100M GPU! Peak power consumption: 45W for CPU + 45W for GPU Question ?! How many cores in my Dell M3800 laptop? 1 { 10? 10 { 100? 100 { 1000? Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 2 / 29 Question ?! How many cores in my Dell M3800 laptop? 1 { 10? 10 { 100? 100 { 1000? Answer: 4 cores in Intel Core i7 CPU + 384 cores in NVIDIA K1100M GPU! Peak power consumption: 45W for CPU + 45W for GPU Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 2 / 29 Top500 supercomputers Really impressive { 300× more capability in 10 years! Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 3 / 29 My personal experience 1982: CDC Cyber 205 (NASA Langley) 1985{89: Alliant FX/8 (MIT) 1989{92: Stellar (MIT) 1990: Thinking Machines CM5 (UTRC) 1987{92: Cray X-MP/Y-MP (NASA Ames, Rolls-Royce) 1993{97: IBM SP2 (Oxford) 1998{2002: SGI Origin (Oxford) 2002 { today: various x86 clusters (Oxford) 2007 { today: various GPU systems/clusters (Oxford) 2011{15: GPU cluster (Emerald @ RAL) 2008 { today: Cray XE6/XC30 (HECToR/ARCHER @ EPCC) 2013 { today: Cray XK7 with GPUs (Titan @ ORNL) Mike Giles (Oxford) HPC Trends June 30, 2015 4 / 29 Top500 supercomputers Power requirements are raising the question of whether this rate of improvement is sustainable.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Distributed Systems Free Ebook
    DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS DOWNLOAD FREE BOOK Maarten van Steen, Andrew S Tanenbaum | 596 pages | 01 Feb 2017 | Createspace Independent Publishing Platform | 9781543057386 | English | United States Distributed Systems - The Complete Guide The hope is that together, the system can maximize resources and information while preventing failures, as if one system fails, it won't affect the availability of the service. Banker's algorithm Dijkstra's algorithm DJP algorithm Prim's algorithm Dijkstra-Scholten algorithm Dekker's algorithm generalization Smoothsort Shunting-yard algorithm Distributed Systems marking algorithm Concurrent algorithms Distributed Systems algorithms Deadlock prevention algorithms Mutual exclusion algorithms Self-stabilizing Distributed Systems. Learn to code for free. For the first time computers would be able to send messages to other systems with a local IP address. The messages passed between machines contain forms of data that the systems want to share like databases, objects, and Distributed Systems. Also known as distributed computing and distributed databases, a distributed system is a collection of independent components located on different machines that share messages with each other in order to achieve common goals. To prevent infinite loops, running the code requires some amount of Ether. As mentioned in many places, one of which this great articleyou cannot have consistency and availability without partition tolerance. Because it works in batches jobs a problem arises where if your job fails — Distributed Systems need to restart the whole thing. While in a voting system an attacker need only add nodes to the network which is Distributed Systems, as free access to the network is a design targetin a CPU power based scheme an attacker faces a physical limitation: getting access to more and more powerful hardware.
    [Show full text]