Parallel Sorting Algorithms with Sampling Techniques on Clusters with Processors Running at Different Speeds

  • Christophe Cérin
  • Jean Luc Gaudiot
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1970)

Abstract

In this paper we use the notion of quantile to implement Parallel Sorting by Regular Sampling (PSRS) on homogeneous clusters and we introduce a new algorithm for in-core parallel sorting integer keys which is based on the sampling technique. The algorithm is devoted to clusters with processors running at different speeds correlated by a multiplicative constant factor. This is a weak definition of non-homogeneous clusters but a first attempt (to our knowledge) in this direction.

Keywords

Cache Size Input Size Homogeneous Cluster Regular Sampling Bulk Synchronous Parallel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    H. Shi and J. Schaeffer, “Parallel sorting by regular sampling,” Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 361–372, 1992.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Bonorden, B. Juurlink, I. von Otte, and I. Rieping, “The paderborn university bsp (pub) library-design, implementation and performance,” in 13th International Parallel Processing Symposium and 10th Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, 12-16 April, 1999, San Juan, Puerto Rico, available electronically through IEEE Computer Society, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    N. S. Afonso Ferreira, “A randomized bsp/cgm algorithm for the maximal independent set problem,” Parallel Processing Letters, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 411–422, 1999.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Cérin and J.-L. Gaudiot, “Algorithms for stable sorting to minimize communications in networks of workstations and their implementations in bsp,” in IEEE Computer Society International Wokshop on Cluster Computing (IWCC’99), pp. 112–120, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Blelloch, C. Leiserson, and B. Maggs, “A Comparison of Sorting Algorithms for the Connection Machine CM-2,” in Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, July 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Li and K. C. Sevcik, “Parallel sorting by overpartitioning,” in Proceedings of the 6th Annual Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 46–56, ACM Press, June 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Helman and JáJá, “Sorting on clusters of SMPs,” Informatica: An International Journal of Computing and Informatics, vol. 23, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Quinn, “Analysis and benchmarking of two parallel sorting algorithms: Hyperquicksort and quickmerge,” BIT, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 239–250, 1989.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    X. Li, P. Lu, J. Schaeffer, J. Shillington, P. S. Wong, and H. Shi, “On the versatility of parallel sorting by regular sampling,” Parallel Computing, vol. 19, pp. 1079–1103, Oct. 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christophe Cérin
    • 1
  • Jean Luc Gaudiot
    • 2
  1. 1.Université de Picardie Jules VerneLaRIA, Bat CURIAMIENSFrance
  2. 2.University of Southern CaliforniaElectrical Engineering-SystemsLos Angeles

Personalised recommendations