Adaptive control in rollforward recovery for extreme scale multigrid

With the increasing number of compute components, failures in future exa-scale computer systems are expected to become more frequent. This motivates the study of novel resilience techniques. Here, we extend a recently proposed algorithm-based recovery method for multigrid iterations by introducing an adaptive control. After a fault, the healthy part of the system continues the iterative solution process, while the solution in the faulty domain is re-constructed by an asynchronous on-line recovery. The computations in both the faulty and healthy subdomains must be coordinated in a sensitive way, in particular, both under and over-solving must be avoided. Both of these waste computational resources and will therefore increase the overall time-to-solution. To control the local recovery and guarantee an optimal re-coupling, we introduce a stopping criterion based on a mathematical error estimator. It involves hierarchical weighted sums of residuals within the context of uniformly refined meshes and is well-suited in the context of parallel high-performance computing. The re-coupling process is steered by local contributions of the error estimator. We propose and compare two criteria which differ in their weights. Failure scenarios when solving up to $6.9\cdot10^{11}$ unknowns on more than 245\,766 parallel processes will be reported on a state-of-the-art peta-scale supercomputer demonstrating the robustness of the method

Scheduling Massively Parallel Multigrid for Multilevel Monte Carlo Methods

The computational complexity of naive, sampling-based uncertainty quantification for 3D partial differential equations is extremely high. Multilevel approaches, such as multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC), can reduce the complexity significantly when they are combined with a fast multigrid solver, but to exploit them fully in a parallel environment, sophisticated scheduling strategies are needed. We optimize the concurrent execution across the three layers of the MLMC method: parallelization across levels, across samples, and across the spatial grid. In a series of numerical tests, the influence on the overall performance of the “scalability window” of the multigrid solver (i.e., the range of processor numbers over which good parallel efficiency can be maintained) is illustrated. Different homogeneous and heterogeneous scheduling strategies are proposed and discussed. Finally, large 3D scaling experiments are carried out, including adaptivity

Scheduling Massively Parallel Multigrid for Multilevel Monte Carlo Methods

The computational complexity of naive, sampling-based uncertainty quantification for 3D partial differential equations is extremely high. Multilevel approaches, such as multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC), can reduce the complexity significantly when they are combined with a fast multigrid solver, but to exploit them fully in a parallel environment, sophisticated scheduling strategies are needed. We optimize the concurrent execution across the three layers of the MLMC method: parallelization across levels, across samples, and across the spatial grid. In a series of numerical tests, the influence on the overall performance of the “scalability window” of the multigrid solver (i.e., the range of processor numbers over which good parallel efficiency can be maintained) is illustrated. Different homogeneous and heterogeneous scheduling strategies are proposed and discussed. Finally, large 3D scaling experiments are carried out, including adaptivity

Automatische Codegenerierung für Massiv Parallele Applikationen in der Numerischen Strömungsmechanik

Solving partial differential equations (PDEs) is a fundamental challenge in many application domains in industry and academia alike. With increasingly large problems, efficient and highly scalable implementations become more and more crucial. Today, facing this challenge is more difficult than ever due to the increasingly heterogeneous hardware landscape. One promising approach is developing domain‐specific languages (DSLs) for a set of applications. Using code generation techniques then allows targeting a range of hardware platforms while concurrently applying domain‐specific optimizations in an automated fashion. The present work aims to further the state of the art in this field. As domain, we choose PDE solvers and, in particular, those from the group of geometric multigrid methods. To avoid having a focus too broad, we restrict ourselves to methods working on structured and patch‐structured grids. We face the challenge of handling a domain as complex as ours, while providing different abstractions for diverse user groups, by splitting our external DSL ExaSlang into multiple layers, each specifying different aspects of the final application. Layer 1 is designed to resemble LaTeX and allows inputting continuous equations and functions. Their discretization is expressed on layer 2. It is complemented by algorithmic components which can be implemented in a Matlab‐like syntax on layer 3. All information provided to this point is summarized on layer 4, enriched with particulars about data structures and the employed parallelization. Additionally, we support automated progression between the different layers. All ExaSlang input is processed by our jointly developed Scala code generation framework to ultimately emit C++ code. We particularly focus on how to generate applications parallelized with, e.g., MPI and OpenMP that are able to run on workstations and large‐scale cluster alike. We showcase the applicability of our approach by implementing simple test problems, like Poisson’s equation, as well as relevant applications from the field of computational fluid dynamics (CFD). In particular, we implement scalable solvers for the Stokes, Navier‐Stokes and shallow water equations (SWE) discretized using finite differences (FD) and finite volumes (FV). For the case of Navier‐Stokes, we also extend our implementation towards non‐uniform grids, thereby enabling static mesh refinement, and advanced effects such as the simulated fluid being non‐Newtonian and non‐isothermal