Reducing Performance Evaluation Sensitivity and Variability by Input Shaking

Simulations sometimes lead to observed sensitivity to configuration parameters as well as inconsistent performance results. The question is then what is the true effect and what is a coincidental artifact of the evaluation. The shaking methodology answers this by executing multiple simulations under small perturbations to the input workload, and calculating the average performance result; if the effect persists we can be more confident that it is real, whereas if it disappears it was an artifact. We present several examples where the sensitivity that appears in results based on a single evaluation is eliminated or considerably reduced by the shaking methodology. While our examples come from evaluations of scheduling algorithms for supercomputers, we believe the method has wider applicability.

[1]  Evgenia Smirni,et al.  Multiple-queue backfilling scheduling with priorities and reservations for parallel systems , 2002, PERV.

[2]  Dan Tsafrir,et al.  Modeling User Runtime Estimates , 2005, JSSPP.

[3]  Dan Tsafrir,et al.  Instability in parallel job scheduling simulation: the role of workload flurries , 2006, Proceedings 20th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium.

[4]  Dror G. Feitelson,et al.  Locality of sampling and diversity in parallel system workloads , 2007, ICS '07.

[5]  Dan Tsafrir,et al.  The Dynamics of Backfilling: Solving the Mystery of Why Increased Inaccuracy May Help , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Workload Characterization.

[6]  Lior Amar,et al.  An organizational grid of federated MOSIX clusters , 2005, CCGrid 2005. IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2005..

[7]  Jon B. Weissman,et al.  A new metric for robustness with application to job scheduling , 2005, HPDC-14. Proceedings. 14th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, 2005..

[8]  Lars Malinowsky,et al.  Scheduling of a Parallel Workload: Implementation and Use of the Argonne Easy Scheduler at PDC , 1998, PARA.

[9]  Cynthia Bailey Lee,et al.  Are User Runtime Estimates Inherently Inaccurate? , 2004, JSSPP.

[10]  David A. Wood,et al.  Variability in architectural simulations of multi-threaded workloads , 2003, The Ninth International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, 2003. HPCA-9 2003. Proceedings..

[11]  Dror G. Feitelson,et al.  Utilization and Predictability in Scheduling the IBM SP2 with Backfilling , 1998, Proceedings of the First Merged International Parallel Processing Symposium and Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing.

[12]  Teofilo F. Gonzalez,et al.  An Efficient Algorithm for the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Lilliefors Tests , 1977, TOMS.

[13]  Dan Tsafrir,et al.  Backfilling Using System-Generated Predictions Rather than User Runtime Estimates , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems.

[14]  Evgenia Smirni,et al.  Multiple-Queue Backfilling Scheduling with Priorities and Reservations for Parallel Systems , 2002, JSSPP.