Making a packet: Cost-effective communication for a parallel graph reducer
How much graph should go into a packet?
How aggressively should a processor look for work after requesting remote data?
In order to answer the first question, we compare various packing schemes, of which one extreme packs just the node that is demanded (“incremental fetching”), and the other packs all the graph that is reachable from that node (“bulk fetching”). The second question is addressed by considering various mechanisms for latency hiding during communication, ranging from fully synchronous communication with no attempt to mask latency, to full thread migration during asynchronous communication. In order to make our results as general as possible, we have used the GranSim simulator to study a wide variety of parallel machine configurations. Based on these measurements we propose concrete improvements for parallel graph reducers such as the GUM implementation of Glasgow Parallel Haskell.
KeywordsParallel Machine Packet Size Functional Programming Asynchronous Communication Remote Data
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [Cha97]M. Chakravarty. On the Massively Parallel Execution of Declarative Programs. PhD Thesis, Technical Univ. of Berlin, Feb. 1997.Google Scholar
- [CGS93]D.E. Culler, S.C. Goldstein, K.E. Schauser, T. von Eicken. TAM — A Compiler Controlled Threaded Abstract Machine. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 18:347–370, Jun. 1993.Google Scholar
- [FN96]C. Flanagan and R.S. Nikhil. pHluid: The Design of a Parallel Functional Language Implementation on Workstations. In ICFP'96 — Intl. Conf. on Functional Programming, pp. 169–179, Philadelphia, PA, May 24–26, 1996. ACM Press.Google Scholar
- [Gol88]B. Goldberg. Multiprocessor Execution of Functional Programs. Intl. Journal of Parallel Programming, 17(5):425–473, Oct. 1988.Google Scholar
- [HLP95]K. Hammond, H-W. Loidl, and A. Partridge. Visualising Granularity in Parallel Programs: A Graphical Winnowing System for Haskell. In HPFC'95 — Conf. on High Performance Functional Computing, pp. 208–221, Denver, CO, Apr. 10–12, 1995.Google Scholar
- [Kes96]M. Kesseler. The Implementation of Functional Languages on Parallel Machines with Distributed Memory. PhD thesis, Univ. of Nijmegen, Apr. 1996.Google Scholar
- [KLB91]H. Kingdon, D. Lester, and G. Burn. The HDG-machine: a highly distributed graph-reducer for a transputer network. The Computer Journal, 34(4):290–301, 1991.Google Scholar
- [Loi96]H-W. Loidl. GranSim User's Guide. Dept. of Computing Science, Univ. of Glasgow. Jul. 1996.Google Scholar
- [MKH90]E. Mohr, D.A. Kranz, and R.H. Halstead Jr. Lazy Task Creation: A Technique for Increasing the Granularity of Parallel Programs. In LFP'90 — Conf. on Lisp and Functional Programming, pp. 185–197, Nice, France, Jun. 27–29, 1990.Google Scholar
- [MSS94]R.G. Morgan, M.H. Smith, and S. Short. Translation by Meaning and Style in Lolita. In Intl. BCS Conf. — Machine Translation Ten Years On, Cranfield Univ., Nov. 1994.Google Scholar
- [Ost93]G. Ostheimer. Parallel Functional Programming for Message-Passing Multiprocessors. PhD thesis, Univ. of St Andrews, Mar. 1993.Google Scholar
- [PCS89]S.L. Peyton Jones, C. Clack, and J. Salkild. High-Performance Parallel Graph Reduction. In PARLE'89 — Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe, LNCS 365, pp. 193–206. Springer-Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
- [PCSH87]S.L. Peyton Jones, C. Clack, J. Salkild, and M. Hardie. GRIP — a High-Performance Architecture for Parallel Graph Reduction. In FPCA'87 — Intl. Conf. on Functional Programming Languages and Computer Architecture, LNCS 274, pp. 98–112, Portland, OR, Sep. 14–16, 1987. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- [Pey89]S.L. Peyton. Jones. Parallel Implementations of Functional Programming Languages. The Computer Journal, 32(2):175–186, Apr. 1989.Google Scholar
- [PH+97]J.C. Peterson, K. Hammond (eds.) et al. Haskell 1.4 — A Non-Strict, Purely Functional Language, Apr. 1997.Google Scholar
- [TD94]I. Toyn and A.J. Dix. Efficient Binary Transfer of Pointer Structures. Software — Practice and Experience, 24(11):1001–1023, Nov. 1994.Google Scholar
- [THL+96]P. Trinder, K. Hammond, H-W. Loidl, S.L. Peyton Jones, and J. Wu. A Case Study of Data-intensive Programs in Parallel Haskell. In Glasgow Workshop on Functional Programming 1996, Ullapool, Scotland, Jul. 8–10.Google Scholar
- [THM+96]P. Trinder, K. Hammond, J.S. Mattson Jr., A.S. Partridge, and S.L. Peyton Jones. GUM: a portable parallel implementation of Haskell. In PLDI'96 — Programming Languages Design and Implementation, pp. 79–88, Philadelphia, PA, May 1996.Google Scholar
- [WH96]J. Wu and L. Harbird. A Functional Database System for Road Accident Analysis. Advances in Engineering Software, 26(l):29–43, 1996.Google Scholar