Application execution steering using on-the-fly performance prediction

  • D. J. Kerbyson
  • E. Papaefstathiou
  • G. R. Nudd
3. Computer Science
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1401)


The execution of an application on a high performance system requires parameters concerning the problem in hand, and those that determine the system mapping, to be specified by a user. The system parameters are typically used to minimise the execution time. However, by the coupling of a performance model with an application, system parameters can be determined without user intervention. In the work presented here, a novel performance prediction system has been used to provide suitable performance models which can determine application mapping parameters, code execution decisions, and system choices on-the-fly. An example compact application of a convolution is used to illustrate the approach for automatically choosing the actual code to be executed, and the number of workstations in a cluster to be utilised. The performance prediction system is shown to have a reasonable accuracy (approximately 10% error), with a rapid evaluation time (typically < 2s).


High Performance Computing Performance Prediction On-the-fly decision making application steerin 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    D.A. Agard, Y. Hiraoka, P. Shaw, J.W. Sedat, Fluorescence Micrroscopy in Three Dimensions, in Fluorescence Microscopy of Living Cells in Culture, Elsevier, pp. 353–377, 1989Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.N.C. Arabe, A.B.B. Lowekamp, E. Saligman, M.Starkey, and P. Stephan, Dome Parallel programming environment in a heterogeneous multi-user environment, Supercomputing, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Gehring, A. Reinefeld, MARS-A framework for minizing the job execution time in a metacomputing environment, Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 12, pp. 87–99, 1996Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Geist, A. Beguelin, J. Dongarra, W. Jiang, R. Manchek, V. Sunderam, PVM-Parallel Virtual Machine, MIT Press., 1994Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.W. Hall, J.M. Anderson,, Maximizing Multiprocessor Performance with the SUIF Compiler, IEEE Computer, Vol. 29 (12), December 1996Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.J. Kerbyson, E. Papaefstathiou, J.S. Harper, S.C. Perry, G.R. Nudd, Is Predictive Tracing Too Late for HPC Users?, in High Performance Computing, R.J. Allan, A. Simpson, D. A. Nicole (Eds), Plenum Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Papaefstathiou, D.J. Kerbyson, G.R. Nudd, T.J. Atherton, An overview of the CHIP3S Performance Prediction Toolset for Parallel Systems, in Proc of 8th ISCA Int. Conf. on Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 527–533, Orlando, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Papaefstathiou, D. J. Kerbyson, G.R. Nudd, A Layered approach to Parallel Software Performance Prediction: A Case Study, in: L. Dekker, W. Smit, and J.C. Zuidervaart, eds., Massively Parallel Processing Applications & Development, pp. 617–624, North-Holland, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. Quin, H.A. Scholl, R.A. Ammar, Micro Time Cosrt Analysis of Parallel Computation, IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol. 40 (5), pp. 613–628, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Wolski, Dynamically Forecasting Network Performance Using the Network Weather Service, UCSD Technical Report, TR-CS96-494, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. J. Kerbyson
    • 1
  • E. Papaefstathiou
    • 1
  • G. R. Nudd
    • 1
  1. 1.High Performance Architectures GroupUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations