arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2407.20717

Understanding the Impact of Synchronous, Asynchronous, and Hybrid In-Situ Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics Applications

Abstract

High-Performance Computing (HPC) systems provide input/output (IO) performance growing relatively slowly compared to peak computational performance and have limited storage capacity. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) applications aiming to leverage the full power of Exascale HPC systems, such as the solver Nek5000, will generate massive data for further processing. These data need to be efficiently stored via the IO subsystem. However, limited IO performance and storage capacity may result in performance, and thus scientific discovery, bottlenecks. In comparison to traditional post-processing methods, in-situ techniques can reduce or avoid writing and reading the data through the IO subsystem, promising to be a solution to these problems. In this paper, we study the performance and resource usage of three in-situ use cases: data compression, image generation, and uncertainty quantification. We furthermore analyze three approaches when these in-situ tasks and the simulation are executed synchronously, asynchronously, or in a hybrid manner. In-situ compression can be used to reduce the IO time and storage requirements while maintaining data accuracy. Furthermore, in-situ visualization and analysis can save Terabytes of data from being routed through the IO subsystem to storage. However, the overall efficiency is crucially dependent on the characteristics of both, the in-situ task and the simulation. In some cases, the overhead introduced by the in-situ tasks can be substantial. Therefore, it is essential to choose the proper in-situ approach, synchronous, asynchronous, or hybrid, to minimize overhead and maximize the benefits of concurrent execution.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yi Ju, Adalberto Perez, Stefano Markidis, Philipp Schlatter, Erwin Laure. 2024-07-30. Understanding the Impact of Synchronous, Asynchronous, and Hybrid In-Situ Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics Applications. https://doi.org/10.1109/escience55777.2022.00043

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

PASCAL: A Phase-Aware Shared-Cache Model for Parallel Scans

In modern AI Accelerators and GPGPUs, many concurrent cores repeatedly access the same shared data. This pattern occurs in attention, where different query tiles share the same K/V block, GEMM, where every tile in a row reads the same panel, and many other operators. We name this pattern parallel scan. Due to a significant amount of data reuse in this pattern, the cache is expected to capture as much data reuse as possible and largely reduce requests sent to the main memory for both performance and energy consumption concerns. However, in reality, because of the intrinsic asynchrony of multi-cores, the actual cache miss rate and DRAM traffic can be much higher compared to ideal cases. In this paper, we propose PASCAL, a shared-cache model for parallel scans. It is aware of the dynamic feature of progress divergence across multi-cores, correlate the divergence with the combination of different factors such as occupancy, and predicts the cache miss rate before execution. Because prediction needs no target trace, timing, or counters, PASCAL supports design-space exploration at scales where cycle-accurate simulation is impractical, and its policy-independent bound states how much traffic no replacement policy can avoid. A MAPE of 13.84% is achieved in a 60-configuration dataset with various software pipeline depths, occupancies, and memory access data paths on an NVIDIA GB10 GPU, against 44.79% for physical-wave TileSight and 54.16% for exact symbolic SDCM.

cs.PF

Mathematical Modeling of a Cognitive Continuum Digital Shadow for Large-Scale, Cross-Facility Workflows

We present the mathematical foundations of a \emph{Cognitive Continuum Digital Shadow} (CCDS), a decision-support layer between users and the cross-facility infrastructure---instruments, networks, data stores and compute centers---of exascale and post-exascale scientific workflows. The CCDS couples a state-space representation of the continuum with multistage stochastic programming, so that deployment scenarios can be explored and optimized \emph{before} jobs are launched. This allows operators and users to quantify the cost, makespan and energy trade-offs of a workflow under uncertain resource availability, and hedge their decisions accordingly. We formulate the underlying optimization as a multimode, resource-constrained, stochastic supply-chain network design problem and demonstrate it on a realistic genomics workflow scheduled across heterogeneous HPC and data-center resources. This is the first of three papers; the second treats the underlying software architecture and the third reports large-scale use-cases.

cs.PF

RGB Input Pipelines: Throughput, GPU Memory, and Transformation Coverage

An image-augmentation pipeline must deliver a complete batch before a model can use it. We compare seven input paths from five libraries, starting with RGB JPEG files and ending with a synchronized CUDA float16 batch. We manually matched transformation recipes and parameters across libraries to make the workloads as comparable as possible. The experiment uses 57 selected recipes, a batch size of 256, and one NVIDIA L4 machine. Throughput and peak process GPU memory are recorded together in 759 measurements. On the 11 recipes shared by all paths, DALI and AlbumentationsX have median throughputs of 5,029 and 4,679 images/s, with median peak GPU memory of 2,086 and 1,852 MiB. Broader pairwise comparisons favor AlbumentationsX on 26/26 TorchVision recipes, 50/51 Kornia recipes, and 25/26 Pillow recipes. DALI is faster than AlbumentationsX on all 22 shared recipes, with a median throughput ratio of 1.18x. A separate census reports coverage of the 118 entries in a selected AlbumentationsX RGB catalog. The study measures input preparation at fixed settings; it does not measure model training, numerical equivalence, or the best attainable configuration of each library. Benchmark code: https://github.com/albumentations-team/benchmark.

cs.PF