Matrix Factorization at Scale: a Comparison of Scientific Data Analytics in Spark and C+MPI Using Three Case Studies

We explore the trade-offs of performing linear algebra using Apache Spark, compared to traditional C and MPI implementations on HPC platforms. Spark is designed for data analytics on cluster computing platforms with access to local disks and is optimized for data-parallel tasks. We examine three widely-used and important matrix factorizations: NMF (for physical plausability), PCA (for its ubiquity) and CX (for data interpretability). We apply these methods to TB-sized problems in particle physics, climate modeling and bioimaging. The data matrices are tall-and-skinny which enable the algorithms to map conveniently into Spark's data-parallel model. We perform scaling experiments on up to 1600 Cray XC40 nodes, describe the sources of slowdowns, and provide tuning guidance to obtain high performance

Characterizing Deep-Learning I/O Workloads in TensorFlow

The performance of Deep-Learning (DL) computing frameworks rely on the performance of data ingestion and checkpointing. In fact, during the training, a considerable high number of relatively small files are first loaded and pre-processed on CPUs and then moved to accelerator for computation. In addition, checkpointing and restart operations are carried out to allow DL computing frameworks to restart quickly from a checkpoint. Because of this, I/O affects the performance of DL applications. In this work, we characterize the I/O performance and scaling of TensorFlow, an open-source programming framework developed by Google and specifically designed for solving DL problems. To measure TensorFlow I/O performance, we first design a micro-benchmark to measure TensorFlow reads, and then use a TensorFlow mini-application based on AlexNet to measure the performance cost of I/O and checkpointing in TensorFlow. To improve the checkpointing performance, we design and implement a burst buffer. We find that increasing the number of threads increases TensorFlow bandwidth by a maximum of 2.3x and 7.8x on our benchmark environments. The use of the tensorFlow prefetcher results in a complete overlap of computation on accelerator and input pipeline on CPU eliminating the effective cost of I/O on the overall performance. The use of a burst buffer to checkpoint to a fast small capacity storage and copy asynchronously the checkpoints to a slower large capacity storage resulted in a performance improvement of 2.6x with respect to checkpointing directly to slower storage on our benchmark environment.Comment: Accepted for publication at pdsw-DISCS 201

Scientific Computing Meets Big Data Technology: An Astronomy Use Case

Scientific analyses commonly compose multiple single-process programs into a dataflow. An end-to-end dataflow of single-process programs is known as a many-task application. Typically, tools from the HPC software stack are used to parallelize these analyses. In this work, we investigate an alternate approach that uses Apache Spark -- a modern big data platform -- to parallelize many-task applications. We present Kira, a flexible and distributed astronomy image processing toolkit using Apache Spark. We then use the Kira toolkit to implement a Source Extractor application for astronomy images, called Kira SE. With Kira SE as the use case, we study the programming flexibility, dataflow richness, scheduling capacity and performance of Apache Spark running on the EC2 cloud. By exploiting data locality, Kira SE achieves a 2.5x speedup over an equivalent C program when analyzing a 1TB dataset using 512 cores on the Amazon EC2 cloud. Furthermore, we show that by leveraging software originally designed for big data infrastructure, Kira SE achieves competitive performance to the C implementation running on the NERSC Edison supercomputer. Our experience with Kira indicates that emerging Big Data platforms such as Apache Spark are a performant alternative for many-task scientific applications

A Tale of Two Data-Intensive Paradigms: Applications, Abstractions, and Architectures

Scientific problems that depend on processing large amounts of data require overcoming challenges in multiple areas: managing large-scale data distribution, co-placement and scheduling of data with compute resources, and storing and transferring large volumes of data. We analyze the ecosystems of the two prominent paradigms for data-intensive applications, hereafter referred to as the high-performance computing and the Apache-Hadoop paradigm. We propose a basis, common terminology and functional factors upon which to analyze the two approaches of both paradigms. We discuss the concept of "Big Data Ogres" and their facets as means of understanding and characterizing the most common application workloads found across the two paradigms. We then discuss the salient features of the two paradigms, and compare and contrast the two approaches. Specifically, we examine common implementation/approaches of these paradigms, shed light upon the reasons for their current "architecture" and discuss some typical workloads that utilize them. In spite of the significant software distinctions, we believe there is architectural similarity. We discuss the potential integration of different implementations, across the different levels and components. Our comparison progresses from a fully qualitative examination of the two paradigms, to a semi-quantitative methodology. We use a simple and broadly used Ogre (K-means clustering), characterize its performance on a range of representative platforms, covering several implementations from both paradigms. Our experiments provide an insight into the relative strengths of the two paradigms. We propose that the set of Ogres will serve as a benchmark to evaluate the two paradigms along different dimensions.Comment: 8 pages, 2 figure

Scientific image processing within the NFFA-EUROPE Data Repository

This thesis is embedded within the NFFA-EUROPE project, that aims to setup the first overarching Information and Data management Repository Platform (IDRP) for the nanoscience community. The main goal of the IDRP developement is to semiautomatize the harvesting of scientific data coming from many different instruments among NFFA European facilities, and identify the correct metadata to allow them to be searchable accordingly to the FAIR Guiding Principles [1]. For our analysis, we selected data from a specific instrument, the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). The reasons for this choice are many:..