The evaluation of parallel job schedulers hinges on the workloads used. It is suggested that this be standardized, in terms of both format and content, so as to ease the evaluation and comparison of different systems. The question remains whether this can encompass both traditional parallel systems and metacomputing systems. This paper is based on a panel on this subject that was held at the workshop, and the ensuing discussion; its authors are both the panel members and participants from the audience. Naturally, not all of us agree with all the opinions expressed here...

Abstract.The NAS facility has operated parallel supercomputers for the past 11 years, including the Intel iPSC/860, Intel Paragon, Thinking Machines CM-5, IBM SP-2, and Cray Origin 2000. Across this wide variety of machine architectures, across a span of 10 years, across a large number of different users, and through thousands of minor configuration and policy changes, the utilization of these machines shows three general trends: (1) scheduling using a naive FCFS first-fit policy results in 40-60% utilization, (2) switching to the more sophisticated dynamic backfilling scheduling algorithm improves utilization by about 15 percentage points (yielding about 70% utilization), and (3) reducing the maximum allowable job size further increases utilization. Most surprising is the consistency of these trends. Over the lifetime of the NAS parallel systems, we made hundreds, perhaps thousands, of small changes to hardware, software, and policy, yet utilization was affected little. In particular, these results show that the goal of achieving near 100% utilization while supporting a real parallel supercomputing workload is unrealistic.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract