Efficient virtual interface architecture (VIA) support for the IBM SP switch-connected NT clusters

Banikazemi, Mohammad; Moorthy, Vijay; Herger, Lorraine M.; Panda, Dhabaleswar K.; Abali, Bülent

doi:10.1109/ipdps.2000.845962

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…VIA has several successful implementations for both custom and Ethernet adapters, e.g., Myrinet-VI [10], Giganet VIA [17], M-VIA [9], ServerNet VIA [30], and FirmVIA [4]. Our experiments use Giganet VIA.…”

Section: User-level Communication and Viamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

PRESS: a clustered server based on user-level communication

Bianchini

2005

IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this paper, we propose and evaluate a cluster-based network server called PRESS. The server relies on localityconscious request distribution and a standard for user-level communication to achieve high performance and portability. We evaluate PRESS by first isolating the performance benefits of three key features of user-level communication: low processor overhead, remote memory accesses, and zero-copy transfers. Next, we compare PRESS to servers that involve less intercluster communication, but are not as easily portable. Our results for an 8-node server cluster and five WWW traces demonstrate that user-level communication can improve performance by as much as 52 percent compared to a kernel-level protocol. Low processor overhead, remote memory writes, and zero-copy all make nontrivial contributions toward this overall gain. Our results also show that portability in PRESS causes no throughput degradation when we exploit user-level communication extensively.

show abstract

Section: User-level Communication and Viamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both industry and academia have produced implementations of VIA [4], [9], [10], [17], [30], [37]. These studies have been performed in the context of microbenchmarks, parallel, and/or distributed applications.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

PRESS: a clustered server based on user-level communication

Bianchini

2005

IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, virtual memory automatically provides protected access to the network. Several ULNs [37], [38], [23], [2] based on variations of this paradigm have been developed.…”

Section: User-level Networking (Uln)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of workload and system parameters on next generation cluster scheduling mechanisms

Zhang

Sivasubramaniam

Moreira

et al. 2001

IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractÐScheduling of processes onto processors of a parallel machine has always been an important and challenging area of research. The issue becomes even more crucial and difficult as we gradually progress to the use of off-the-shelf workstations, operating systems, and high bandwidth networks to build cost-effective clusters for demanding applications. Clusters are gaining acceptance not just in scientific applications that need supercomputing power, but also in domains such as databases, web service, and multimedia which place diverse Quality-of-Service (QoS) demands on the underlying system. Further, these applications have diverse characteristics in terms of their computation, communication, and I/O requirements, making conventional parallel scheduling solutions, such as space sharing or gang scheduling, unattractive. At the same time, leaving it to the native operating system of each node to make decisions independently can lead to ineffective use of system resources whenever there is communication. Instead, an emerging class of dynamic coscheduling mechanisms that attempt to take remedial actions to guide the system toward coscheduled execution without requiring explicit synchronization offers a lot of promise for cluster scheduling. Using a detailed simulator, this paper evaluates the pros and cons of different dynamic coscheduling alternatives while comparing their advantages over traditional gang scheduling (and not performing any coordinated scheduling at all). The impact of dynamic job arrivals, job characteristics, and different system parameters on these alternatives is evaluated in terms of several performance criteria. In addition, heuristics to enhance one of the alternatives even further are identified, classified, and evaluated. It is shown that these heuristics can significantly outperform the other alternatives over a spectrum of workload and system parameters and is thus a much better option for clusters than conventional gang scheduling.

show abstract

“…VIA can be implemented in either software or hardware. Successful implementations include M-VIA [5], Berkeley VIA [6], Firm VIA [16] [17], ServerNet II [7] and cLAN [8]. Recently, InfiniBand Architecture (IBA) [18] which evolved from VIA, has been presented and a number of related works have been published [28] [29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%