loading...
An Empirical Evaluation ofWork Stealing with Parallelism Feedback
Lisboa, Portugal July 04-July 07
DOI Bookmark: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/ICDCS.2006.1426th IEEE International Conference on ...
 This Article 
 
PDF
HTML
 
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Kunal Agrawal, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Yuxiong He, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Charles E. Leiserson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

A-STEAL is a provably good adaptive work-stealing thread scheduler that provides parallelism feedback to a multiprocessor job scheduler. A-STEAL uses a simple multiplicative-increase, multiplicative-decrease algorithm to provide continual parallelism feedback to the job scheduler in the form of processor requests. Although jobs scheduled by A-STEAL can be shown theoretically to complete in near-optimal time asymptotically while utilizing at least a constant fraction of the allotted processors, the constants in the analysis leave it open on whether A-STEAL works well in practice. This paper confirms with simulation studies that A-STEAL performs well when scheduling adaptively parallel work-stealing jobs on large-scale multiprocessors.

Our studies monitored the behavior of A-STEAL on a simulated multiprocessor system using synthetic workloads. We measured the completion time and waste of A-STEAL on over 2300 job runs using a variety of processor availability profiles. Linear-regression analysis indicates that ASTEAL provides almost perfect linear speedup. In addition, A-STEAL typically wasted less than 20% of the processor cycles allotted to the job. We compared A-STEAL with the ABP algorithm, an adaptive work-stealing thread scheduler developed by Arora, Blumofe, and Plaxton which does not employ parallelism feedback. On moderately to heavily loaded large machines with predetermined availability profiles, A-STEAL typically completed jobs more than twice as quickly, despite being allotted the same or fewer processors on every step, while wasting only 10% of the processor cycles wasted by ABP. We compared the utilization of A-STEAL and ABP when many jobs with varying characteristics are using the same multiprocessor. These experiments provide evidence that A-STEAL consistently provides higher utilization than ABP for a variety of job mixes.

Citation:
Kunal Agrawal, Yuxiong He, Charles E. Leiserson, "An Empirical Evaluation ofWork Stealing with Parallelism Feedback," icdcs, pp.19, 26th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS'06), 2006
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.