Evaluating Scientific Workflow Execution on an Asymmetric Multicore Processor
Asymmetric multicore architectures that integrate different types of cores are emerging as a potential solution for good performance and power efficiency. Although scheduling can be improved by utilizing an appropriate set of cores for the execution of the different jobs, determining frequency configurations is also crucial to achieve both good performance and energy efficiency. This challenge may be more profound with scientific workflow applications that consist of jobs with data dependency constraints. The paper focuses on deploying and evaluating the Montage scientific workflow on an asymmetric multicore platform with the aim to explore CPU frequency configurations with different trade-offs between execution time and energy efficiency. The proposed approach provides good estimates of workflow execution time and energy consumption for different frequency configurations with an average error of less than 8.63% for time and less than 9.69% for energy compared to actual values.
This work was supported through a collaboration grant from HiPEAC (www.hipeac.net), the RoMoL ERC Advanced Grant (GA 321253), by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (contract TIN2015-65316-P), and by Generalitat de Catalunya (contracts 2014-SGR-1051 and 2014-SGR-1272).
- 1.Ahmad, I., Ranka, S., Khan, S.U.: Using game theory for scheduling tasks on multi-core processors for simultaneous optimization of performance and energy. In: Proceedings of the IPDPS, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
- 2.Canon, L.C., Jeannot, E., Sakellariou, R., Zheng, W.: Comparative evaluation of the robustness of DAG scheduling heuristics. In: Gorlatch, S., Fragopoulou, P., Priol, T. (eds.) Grid Computing: Achievements and Prospects, pp. 73–84. Springer, Boston (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09457-1_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Deelman, E., Singh, G., Su, M.H., Blythe, J., Gil, Y., Kesselman, C., Mehta, G., Vahi, K., Berriman, G.B., Good, J.: Pegasus: a framework for mapping complex scientific workflows onto distributed systems. Sci. Program. 13(3), 219–237 (2005)Google Scholar
- 8.Ge, R., Feng, X., Cameron, K.W.: Modeling and evaluating energy-performance efficiency of parallel processing on multicore based power aware systems. In: Proceedings of the IPDPS, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Katz, D.S., Jacob, J.C., Deelman, E., Kesselman, C., Singh, G., Su, M.H., Berriman, G., Good, J., Laity, A., Prince, T.A.: A comparison of two methods for building astronomical image mosaics on a grid. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops, pp. 85–94. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
- 12.Topcuoglu, H., Hariri, S., Wu, M.Y.: Performance-effective and low-complexity task scheduling for heterogeneous computing. IEEE TPDS 13(3), 260–274 (2002)Google Scholar
- 14.Von Laszewski, G., Wang, L., Younge, A.J., He, X.: Power-aware scheduling of virtual machines in DVFS-enabled clusters. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing and Workshops, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
- 15.Young, B.D., Pasricha, S., Maciejewski, A.A., Siegel, H.J., Smith, J.T.: Heterogeneous makespan and energy-constrained DAG scheduling. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Energy Efficient High Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing, pp. 3–12. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
- 16.Zheng, W., Bao, W., Xu, C., Zhang, D.: Evaluation of the DAG ready tasks maximization algorithms in multi-core computing platforms. In: Proceedings of the CBD, pp. 110–115 (2016)Google Scholar