Fault tolerance is a major concern to guarantee availability of critical services as well as application execution. Traditional approaches for fault tolerance include checkpoint/restart or duplication. However it is also possible to anticipate failures and proactively take action before failures occur in order to minimize failure impact on the system and application execution.This document presents a proactive fault tolerance framework. This framework can use different proactive fault tolerance mechanisms, i.e., migration and pause/unpause. The framework also allows the implementation of new proactive fault tolerance policies thanks to a modular architecture. A first proactive fault tolerance policy has been implemented and preliminary experimentations have been done based on system-level virtualization and compared with results obtained by simulation.

Abstract. Virtualization technology has been gaining acceptance in the scientific community due to its overall flexibility in running HPC applications. It has been reported that a specific class of applications is better suited to a particular type of virtualization scheme or implementation. For example, Xen has been shown to perform with little overhead for compute-bound applications. Such a study, although useful, does not allow us to generalize conclusions beyond the performance analysis of that application which is explicitly executed. An explanation of why the generalization described above is difficult, may be due to the versatility in applications, which leads to different overheads in virtual environments. For example, two similar applications may spend disproportionate amount of time in their respective library code when run in virtual environments. In this paper, we aim to study such potential causes by investigating the behavior and identifying patterns of various overheads for HPC benchmark applications. Based on the investigation of the overhead profiles for different benchmarks, we aim to address questions such as: Are the overhead profiles for a particular type of benchmarks (such as compute-bound) similar or are there grounds to conclude otherwise?

Abstract-Various mechanisms for fault-tolerance (FT) are used today in order to reduce the impact of failures on application execution. In the case of system failure, standard FT mechanisms are checkpoint/restart (for reactive FT) and migration (for pro-active FT). However, each of these mechanisms create an overhead on application execution, overhead that for instance becomes critical on large-scale systems where previous studies have shown that applications may spend more time checkpointing state than performing useful work.In order to decrease this overhead, researchers try to both optimize existing FT mechanisms and implement new FT policies. For instance, combining reactive and pro-active approaches in order to decrease the number of checkpoints that must be performed during the application's execution. However, currently no solutions exist which enable the evaluation of these FT approaches through simulation, instead experimentations must be done using real platforms. This increases complexity and limits experimentation into alternate solutions. This paper presents a simulation framework that evaluates different FT mechanisms and policies. The framework uses system failure logs for the simulation with a default behavior based on logs taken from the ASCI White at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. We evaluate the accuracy of our simulator comparing simulated results with those taken from experiments done on a 32-node compute cluster. Therefore such a simulator can be used to develop new FT policies and/or to tune existing policies.

No abstract

No abstract