Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
Different from data parallel model, task parallel computing model is very important for complex analysis and data mining. Task granularity is a key factor that significantly affects the performance of task-centric parallel programs. However, current task-granularity based solutions either only work well for regular task-parallel programs or are difficult to use. As a result, for irregular task-parallel programs, these solutions may suffer from inappropriate task granularity. To meet this challenge, in this paper, we propose an adaptive task-granularity based scheduling strategy, called ATG. It not only can adaptively switch between help-first and serialization scheduling policies to control task granularity, but also can prevent fine-grained tasks from being executed in parallel to reduce the task-creation overhead. Experiment results show that compared with manual cut-off strategy, the performance of irregular task parallel applications can be improved by ATG strategy up to 19% with low overhead. Meanwhile, for the regular task-parallel applications ATG strategy can even get almost the same performance of the optimal manual cut-off scheme as well. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2014 | 10.1109/HPCC.2014.32 | HPCC/CSS/ICESS |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
task granularity,scheduling,adaptive,atg,parallel programming,adaptive task granularity based scheduling,multicore,serialization scheduling policies,task analysis,task-centric parallel programs,task parallel computing model,task-centric parallelism,help-first scheduling policies,multicore processing,parallel processing,switches | Load management,Serialization,Task parallelism,Computer science,Scheduling (computing),Parallel processing,Parallel computing,Real-time computing,Data parallelism,Granularity,Multi-core processor,Distributed computing | Conference |
ISBN | Citations | PageRank |
978-1-4799-6122-1 | 1 | 0.35 |
References | Authors | |
15 | 6 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Jianmin Bi | 1 | 1 | 0.35 |
Xiaofei Liao | 2 | 1145 | 120.57 |
Yu Zhang | 3 | 69 | 17.13 |
Chencheng Ye | 4 | 9 | 3.82 |
Hai Jin | 5 | 6544 | 644.63 |
Laurence T. Yang | 6 | 6870 | 682.61 |