Network Reconfiguration Algorithm (NRA) for scheduling communication-intensive graphs in heterogeneous computing environment

  • Anum Masood
  • Saima Gulzar AhmadEmail author
  • Hikmat Ullah Khan
  • Ehsan Ullah Munir


Distributed environments are widely used for computing complex applications modeled as task graphs. The computer network becomes more complex when the compute nodes are heterogeneous, however by choosing the appropriate network communication links for communication between a pair of compute tasks can enhance the computing efficiency(called network reconfiguration). One of the steps in heterogeneous network reconfiguration problem is mapping the application task graph edges on the network links. High Performance Computing (HPC) systems are usually heterogeneous, therefore mapping task graph edges on the communication links should consider the two factors: communication cost of task graph edges and the communication capability of network links. The system performance enhances if tasks are mapped on the compute nodes based on the computational costs of the tasks and the processing capability of compute nodes in addition to the edge scheduling on network links. In our earlier algorithm, Heterogeneous Edge and Task Scheduling (HETS) both edge and task mapping simultaneously improve the execution performance of task graphs. The proposed Network Reconfiguration Algorithm (NRA) minimizes the communication overhead and optimizes the schedule length with contention-aware model. NRA reduces an attribute Kirchhoff Index (KI) for optimal network reconfiguration providing minimum execution time. Both synthesized and task graphs of real applications are used for evaluation. The simulation results prove the efficiency of NRA in terms of average schedule length, schedule length ratio, speedup and system throughput. Comparisons with the baseline algorithms show that NRA provides 36% improved results specially for communication-intensive applications.


Heterogeneous parallel systems Network reconfiguration Edge scheduling Kirchhoff Index 



  1. 1.
    Kelly, S.M., Brightwell, R.: Software architecture of the light weight kernel, catamount. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Cray User Group Annual Technical Conference, pp. 16–19 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Foster, I., Zhao, Y., Raicu, I., Lu, S.: Cloud computing and grid computing 360-degree compared. In: IEEE 2008 Grid Computing Environments Workshop, November 2008Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shiralkar, G., Fleming, G., Watts, J., Wong, T., Coats, B., Mossbarger, R., Robbana, E., Batten, A.: Development and field application of a high performance, unstructured simulator with parallel capability. In: SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C.: The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kofler, K., Grasso, I., Cosenza, B., Fahringer, T.: An automatic input-sensitive approach for heterogeneous task partitioning. In: Proceedings of the 27th international ACM Conference on Supercomputing. ACM Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hackett, A., Ajwani, D., Ali, S., Kirkland, S., Morrison, J.P.: A network configuration algorithm based on optimization of Kirchhoff index. In: IEEE 27th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, May 2013Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahmad, S.G., Liew, C.S., Rafique, M.M., Munir, E.U., Khan, S.U.: Data-intensive workflow optimization based on application task graph partitioning in heterogeneous computing systems. In: 2014 IEEE Fourth International Conference on Big Data and Cloud Computing, December 2014Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ahmad, S.G., Liew, C.S., Munir, E.U., Ang, T.F., Khan, S.U.: A hybrid genetic algorithm for optimization of scheduling workflow applications in heterogeneous computing systems. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 87, 80–90 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zheng, W., Qin, Y., Bugingo, E., Zhang, D., Chen, J.: Cost optimization for deadline-aware scheduling of big-data processing jobs on clouds. Fut. Gen. Comput. Syst. 82, 244–255 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Masood, A., Munir, E.U., Rafique, M.M., Khan, S.U.: HETS: Heterogeneous edge and task scheduling algorithm for heterogeneous computing systems. In: IEEE 17th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    He, T., Stankovic, J., Lu, C., Abdelzaher, T.: SPEED: a stateless protocol for real-time communication in sensor networks. In: IEEE 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sow, D., Biem, A., Blount, M., Ebling, M., Verscheure, O.: Body sensor data processing using stream computing. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia Information Retrieval. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rixner, Scott, : Stream Processor Architecture. Springer, Berlin (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buck, I., Foley, T., Horn, D., Sugerman, J., Fatahalian, K., Houston, M., Hanrahan, P.: Brook for GPUs. In: ACM SIGGRAPH. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Muthukrishnan, S.: Data streams: algorithms and applications. Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci. 1(2), 117–236 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Al-Fares, M., Loukissas, A., Vahdat, A.: A scalable, commodity data center network architecture. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(4), 63 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kamil, S., Oliker, L., Pinar, A., Shalf, J.: Communication requirements and interconnect optimization for high-end scientific applications. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 21(2), 188–202 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Topcuoglu, H., Hariri, S., Wu, M.-Y.: Performance-effective and low-complexity task scheduling for heterogeneous computing. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 13(3), 260–274 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Munir, E.U., Mohsin, S., Hussain, A., Nisar, M.W., Ali, S.: SDBATS: a novel algorithm for task scheduling in heterogeneous computing systems. In: 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and PhD Forum. May 2013Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Verma, A., Kaushal, S.: A hybrid multi-objective particle swarm optimization for scientific workflow scheduling. Parallel Comput. 62, 1–19 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moon, Y., Yu, H., Gil, J.-M., Lim, J.: A slave ants based ant colony optimization algorithm for task scheduling in cloud computing environments. Hum. Centric Comput. Inf. Sci. 7(6), 1–12 (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ahmad, S.G., Munir, E.U., Nisar, W.: PEGA: a performance effective genetic algorithm for task scheduling in heterogeneous systems. In: 2012 IEEE 14th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communication & 2012 IEEE 9th International Conference on Embedded Software and Systems. IEEE, June 2012Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jain, A., Sanyal, S., Das, S., Biswas, R.: “Fastmap: a distributed scheme for mapping large scale applications onto computational grids. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Second International Workshop on Challenges of Large Applications in Distributed Environments (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ajwani, D., Ali, S., Morrison, J.P.: Graph partitioning for reconfigurable topology. In: 2012 IEEE 26th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, May 2012Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pellegrini, F.: Contributions to Multilevel Parallel Graph Partitioning. LaBRI, Universit Bordeaux, Bordeaux (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lasalle, D., Karypis, G.: Multi-threaded graph partitioning. In: 2013 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, May 2013Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    The 10th DIMACS implementation challenge graph partitioning and clustering (Online).
  28. 28.
    Walshaw, C.: The graph partitioning archive (Online).
  29. 29.
    Lugones, D., Katrinis, K., Collier, M.: A reconfigurable optical/electrical interconnect architecture for large-scale clusters and datacenters. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Computing Frontiers. ACM Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Alawneh, L., Rawashdeh, E., Al-Ayyoub, M., Jararweh, Y.: GPU parallelization of sequence segmentation using information theoretic models. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 86, 11–24 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Garg, R., Mittal, M., Son, L.H.: Reliability and energy efficient workflow scheduling in cloud environment. Clust. Comput. (2019).
  32. 32.
    Maurya, A.K., Tripathi, A.K.: On benchmarking task scheduling algorithms for heterogeneous computing systems. J. Supercomput. 74(7), 3039–3070 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tariq, R., Aadil, F., Malik, M.F., Ejaz, S., Khan, M.U., Khan, M.F.: Directed acyclic graph based task scheduling algorithm for heterogeneous systems. In: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Springer, Cham, pp. 936–947 (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Walters, J.P., Chaudhary, V., Cha, M., S.G. Jr., Gallo, S.: A comparison of virtualization technologies for HPC. In: IEEE 22nd International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA 2008) (2008)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu, Z., Zhang, S., Wang, T.: A cooperative particle swarm optimization with constriction factor based on simulated annealing. Computing 100(8), 861–880 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu, D., Sui, X., Li, L., Jiang, Z., Wang, H., Zhang, Z., Zeng, Y.: A cloud service adaptive framework based on reliable resource allocation. Fut. Gener. Comput. Syst. 89, 455–463 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Melab, N., Zomaya, A.Y., Chakroun, I.: Parallel optimization using/for multi and many-core high performance computing. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 112, 109–110 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Khan, Z.A.: Comparison of Dijkstra’s algorithm with other proposed algorithms. (2016)
  39. 39.
    Mamun, A.-A., Rajasekaran, S.: An efficient minimum spanning tree algorithm. In: 2016 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communication (ISCC), June 2016Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ahmad, S.G., Liew, C.S., Rafique, M.M., Munir, E.U.: Optimization of data-intensive workflows in stream-based data processing models. J. Supercomput. 73(9), 3901–3923 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.COMSATS University IslamabadIslamabadPakistan

Personalised recommendations