Status and prospect of ZM4/SIMPLE/PEPP: An event-oriented evaluation environment for parallel and distributed programs
Debugging and performance evaluation of parallel and distributed programs can be facilitated by tools which consider a parallel program in terms of the dynamic flow of significant events and of their interaction.
This paper describes the current state of an evaluation environment, consisting of event-oriented tools which enable the programmer to exactly assess the functional behavior and the performance of parallel and distributed programs. The evaluation environment combines tools for event-driven hardware/software monitoring, event trace analysis, and modeling. It is peculiar to this environment that it closely integrates modeling, monitoring, and event trace analysis and establishes correct causal relationships between events of interest.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- P. Dauphin, F. Hartleb, M. Kienow, V. Mertsiotakis, and A. Quick. PEPP: Performance Evaluation of Parallel Programs — User's Guide — Version 3.3. Technical Report 17/93, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, IMMD VII, September 1993.Google Scholar
- P. Dauphin, R. Hofmann, R. Klar, B. Mohr, A. Quick, M. Siegle, and F. Sötz. ZM4/SIMPLE: a General Approach to Performance-Measurement and-Evaluation of Distributed Systems. In T.L. Casavant and M. Singhal, editors, Readings in Distributed Computing Systems, chapter 6, pages 286–309. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, California, Jan 1994. 0-818-63032-9.Google Scholar
- P. Dauphin and V. Mertsiotakis. MENTOR — a Model Based Event Trace Evaluation Support System. In Tools and Posters Proc. of the 7th Int. Conf. on Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation, Vienna, Austria, May, 3rd–6th 1994.Google Scholar
- D. Ferrari. Considerations on the Insularity of Performance Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-12(6):678–683, June 1986.Google Scholar
- D. Ferrari, G. Serazzi, and A. Zeigner. Measurement and Tuning of Computer Systems. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1983.Google Scholar
- F. Hartleb and V. Mertsiotakis. Bounds for the Mean Runtime of Parallel Programs. In R. Pooley and J. Hillston, editors, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation, pages 197–210, Edinburgh, 1992.Google Scholar
- R. Hofmann. The Distributed Hardware Monitor ZM4 and Its Interface to MEMSY. In A. Bode and M. Dal Cin, editors, Parallel Computer Architectures: Theory, Hardware, Software, Applications, pages 66–79. Springer Lecture LNCS 732, Berlin et al., March 1993.Google Scholar
- R. Hofmann, R. Klar, B. Mohr, A. Quick, and M. Siegle. Distributed Performance Monitoring: Methods, Tools, and Applications. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 5(6):585–598, June 1994.Google Scholar
- Dieter Hogrefe. Estelle, LOTOS und SDL. Springer, Berlin, 1989.Google Scholar
- A. Quick. A New Approach to Behavior Analysis of Parallel Programs Based on Monitoring. In G.R. Joubert, D. Trystram, and F.J. Peters, editors, ParCo '93: Conference on Parallel Computing, Proc. of the Int'l Conference, Grenoble, France, 7–10 September 1993. Advances in Parallel Computing, North-Holland, 1993.Google Scholar
- F. Sötz. A Method for Performance Prediction of Parallel Programs. In H. Burkhart, editor, CONPAR 90-VAPP IV, Joint International Conference on Vector and Parallel Processing. Proceedings, pages 98–107, Zürich, Switzerland, September 1990. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, LNCS 457.Google Scholar