\usepackage[textsize=footnotesize]{todonotes}
\newcommand{\AG}[2][inline]{%
\todo[color=green!50,#1]{\sffamily\textbf{AG:} #2}\xspace}
-\newcommand{\RC}[2][inline]{%
- \todo[color=red!10,#1]{\sffamily\textbf{RC:} #2}\xspace}
+\newcommand{\DL}[2][inline]{%
+ \todo[color=yellow!50,#1]{\sffamily\textbf{DL:} #2}\xspace}
\newcommand{\LZK}[2][inline]{%
\todo[color=blue!10,#1]{\sffamily\textbf{LZK:} #2}\xspace}
+\newcommand{\RC}[2][inline]{%
+ \todo[color=red!10,#1]{\sffamily\textbf{RC:} #2}\xspace}
\algnewcommand\algorithmicinput{\textbf{Input:}}
\algnewcommand\Input{\item[\algorithmicinput]}
\author{%
\IEEEauthorblockN{%
- Charles Emile Ramamonjisoa and
- David Laiymani and
- Arnaud Giersch and
- Lilia Ziane Khodja and
- Raphaël Couturier
+ Charles Emile Ramamonjisoa\IEEEauthorrefmark{1},
+ David Laiymani\IEEEauthorrefmark{1},
+ Arnaud Giersch\IEEEauthorrefmark{1},
+ Lilia Ziane Khodja\IEEEauthorrefmark{2} and
+ Raphaël Couturier\IEEEauthorrefmark{1}
}
- \IEEEauthorblockA{%
- Femto-ST Institute - DISC Department\\
- Université de Franche-Comté\\
- Belfort\\
- Email: \email{{raphael.couturier,arnaud.giersch,david.laiymani,charles.ramamonjisoa}@univ-fcomte.fr}
+ \IEEEauthorblockA{\IEEEauthorrefmark{1}%
+ Femto-ST Institute -- DISC Department\\
+ Université de Franche-Comté,
+ IUT de Belfort-Montbéliard\\
+ 19 avenue du Maréchal Juin, BP 527, 90016 Belfort cedex, France\\
+ Email: \email{{charles.ramamonjisoa,david.laiymani,arnaud.giersch,raphael.couturier}@univ-fcomte.fr}
+ }
+ \IEEEauthorblockA{\IEEEauthorrefmark{2}%
+ Inria Bordeaux Sud-Ouest\\
+ 200 avenue de la Vieille Tour, 33405 Talence cedex, France \\
+ Email: \email{lilia.ziane@inria.fr}
}
}
\maketitle
\RC{Ordre des autheurs pas définitif.}
-\LZK{Adresse de Lilia: Inria Bordeaux Sud-Ouest, 200 Avenue de la Vieille Tour, 33405 Talence Cedex, France \\ Email: lilia.ziane@inria.fr}
\begin{abstract}
-ABSTRACT
-
In recent years, the scalability of large-scale implementation in a
distributed environment of algorithms becoming more and more complex has
always been hampered by the limits of physical computing resources
during the execution. Two important factors determine the success of the
experimentation: the convergence of the iterative algorithm on a large
scale and the execution time reduction in asynchronous mode. Once again,
-from the current work, a simulated environment like Simgrid provides
+from the current work, a simulated environment like SimGrid provides
accurate results which are difficult or even impossible to obtain in a
physical platform by exploiting the flexibility of the simulator on the
computing units clusters and the network structure design. Our
-experimental outputs showed a saving of up to 40 \% for the algorithm
+experimental outputs showed a saving of up to \np[\%]{40} for the algorithm
execution time in asynchronous mode compared to the synchronous one with
-a residual precision up to E-11. Such successful results open
+a residual precision up to \np{E-11}. Such successful results open
perspectives on experimentations for running the algorithm on a
simulated large scale growing environment and with larger problem size.
-Keywords : Algorithm distributed iterative asynchronous simulation
-simgrid
-
+% no keywords for IEEE conferences
+% Keywords: Algorithm distributed iterative asynchronous simulation SimGrid
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
the field. Indeed, the increasing complexity of these requested
applications combined with a continuous increase of their sizes lead to
write distributed and parallel algorithms requiring significant hardware
-resources (grid computing, clusters, broadband network, etc\dots{}) but
+resources (grid computing, clusters, broadband network, etc.) but
also a non-negligible CPU execution time. We consider in this paper a
class of highly efficient parallel algorithms called iterative executed
in a distributed environment. As their name suggests, these algorithm
-solves a given problem that might be NP- complete complex by successive
+solves a given problem that might be NP-complete complex by successive
iterations ($X_{n +1} = f(X_{n})$) from an initial value $X_{0}$ to find
an approximate value $X^*$ of the solution with a very low
residual error. Several well-known methods demonstrate the convergence
section will give a brief description of iterative asynchronous model.
Then, the simulation framework SimGrid will be presented with the
settings to create various distributed architectures. The algorithm of
-the multi -splitting method used by GMRES written with MPI primitives
+the multi-splitting method used by GMRES written with MPI primitives
and its adaptation to SimGrid with SMPI (Simulated MPI) will be in the
next section. At last, the experiments results carried out will be
presented before the conclusion which we will announce the opening of
\section{The asynchronous iteration model}
-Décrire le modèle asynchrone. Je m'en charge (DL)
+\DL{Décrire le modèle asynchrone. Je m'en charge}
\section{SimGrid}
-Décrire SimGrid~\cite{casanova+legrand+quinson.2008.simgrid} (Arnaud)
-
-
-
-
-
+\AG{Décrire SimGrid~\cite{casanova+legrand+quinson.2008.simgrid} (Arnaud)}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Experimental results}
-When the ``real'' application runs in the simulation environment and produces
+When the \emph{real} application runs in the simulation environment and produces
the expected results, varying the input parameters and the program arguments
allows us to compare outputs from the code execution. We have noticed from this
study that the results depend on the following parameters: (1) at the network
network latency (lat). (2) Hosts power (GFlops) can also influence on the
results. And finally, (3) when submitting job batches for execution, the
arguments values passed to the program like the maximum number of iterations or
-the ``external'' precision are critical to ensure not only the convergence of the
+the \emph{external} precision are critical to ensure not only the convergence of the
algorithm but also to get the main objective of the experimentation of the
simulation in having an execution time in asynchronous less than in synchronous
-mode, in others words, in having a ``speedup'' less than 1 (Speedup = Execution
-time in synchronous mode / Execution time in asynchronous mode).
+mode, in others words, in having a \emph{speedup} less than 1
+({speedup}${}={}${execution time in synchronous mode}${}/{}${execution time in
+asynchronous mode}).
A priori, obtaining a speedup less than 1 would be difficult in a local area
network configuration where the synchronous mode will take advantage on the rapid
As a first step, the algorithm was run on a network consisting of two clusters
containing fifty hosts each, totaling one hundred hosts. Various combinations of
the above factors have providing the results shown in Table~\ref{tab.cluster.2x50} with a matrix size
-ranging from Nx = Ny = Nz = 62 to 171 elements or from $62^{3} = \np{238328}$ to
+ranging from $N_x = N_y = N_z = 62 \text{ to } 171$ elements or from $62^{3} = \np{238328}$ to
$171^{3} = \np{5211000}$ entries.
Then we have changed the network configuration using three clusters containing
\item Description of the cluster architecture;
\item Maximum number of internal and external iterations;
\item Internal and external precisions;
- \item Matrix size NX, NY and NZ;
- \item Matrix diagonal value = 6.0;
+ \item Matrix size $N_x$, $N_y$ and $N_z$;
+ \item Matrix diagonal value: \np{6.0};
\item Execution Mode: synchronous or asynchronous.
\end{itemize}
\centering
\caption{2 clusters X 50 nodes}
\label{tab.cluster.2x50}
- \AG{Les images manquent dans le dépôt Git. Si ce sont vraiment des tableaux, utiliser un format vectoriel (eps ou pdf), et surtout pas de jpeg!}
+ \AG{Ces tableaux (\ref{tab.cluster.2x50}, \ref{tab.cluster.3x33} et
+ \ref{tab.cluster.3x67}) sont affreux. Utiliser un format vectoriel (eps ou
+ pdf) ou, mieux, les réécrire en \LaTeX{}. Réécrire les légendes proprement
+ également (\texttt{\textbackslash{}times} au lieu de \texttt{X} par ex.)}
\includegraphics[width=209pt]{img1.jpg}
\end{table}
\centering
\caption{3 clusters X 33 nodes}
\label{tab.cluster.3x33}
- \AG{Le fichier manque.}
+ \AG{Refaire le tableau.}
\includegraphics[width=209pt]{img2.jpg}
\end{table}
\centering
\caption{3 clusters X 67 nodes}
\label{tab.cluster.3x67}
- \AG{Le fichier manque.}
+ \AG{Refaire le tableau.}
% \includegraphics[width=160pt]{img3.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{img3.jpg}
\end{table}
that it was difficult to have a combination which gives an efficiency of
asynchronous below \np[\%]{80}. Indeed, for a matrix size of 62 elements, equality
between the performance of the two modes (synchronous and asynchronous) is
-achieved with an inter cluster of \np[Mbits/s]{10} and a latency of \np{E-1} ms. To
+achieved with an inter cluster of \np[Mbits/s]{10} and a latency of \np[ms]{E-1}. To
challenge an efficiency by \np[\%]{78} with a matrix size of 100 points, it was
necessary to degrade the inter cluster network bandwidth from 5 to 2 Mbit/s.
with a bandwidth of \np[Mbits/s]{1} as shown in Table~\ref{tab.cluster.3x67}.
\section{Conclusion}
-CONCLUSION
-
The experimental results on executing a parallel iterative algorithm in
asynchronous mode on an environment simulating a large scale of virtual
computers organized with interconnected clusters have been presented.
\setcounter{numberedCntD}{\theenumi}
\end{enumerate}
Our results have shown that in certain conditions, asynchronous mode is
-speeder up to 40 \% than executing the algorithm in synchronous mode
+speeder up to \np[\%]{40} than executing the algorithm in synchronous mode
which is not negligible for solving complex practical problems with more
and more increasing size.
% adjust value as needed - may need to be readjusted if
% the document is modified later
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
-\bibliography{hpccBib}
+\bibliography{IEEEabrv,hpccBib}
\end{document}
