DMCA
Coordinated checkpoint versus message log for fault tolerant MPI
Cached
Download Links
- [www.lri.fr]
- [www.cs.utk.edu]
- [mpich-v.lri.fr]
- DBLP
Other Repositories/Bibliography
| Citations: | 35 - 8 self |
BibTeX
@MISC{Bouteiller_coordinatedcheckpoint,
author = {Aurélien Bouteiller and Pierre Lemarinier and Géraud Krawezik and Franck Cappello},
title = {Coordinated checkpoint versus message log for fault tolerant MPI },
year = {}
}
Share
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
OpenURL
Abstract
MPI is one of the most adopted programming models for Large Clusters and Grid deployments. However, these systems often suffer from network or node failures. This raises the issue of selecting a fault tolerance approach for MPI. Automatic and transparent ones are based on either coordinated checkpointing or message logging associated with uncoordinated checkpoint. They are many protocols, implementations and optimizations for these approaches but few results about their comparison. Coordinated checkpoint has the advantage of a very low overhead on fault free executions. In contrary a message logging protocol systematically adds a significant message transfer penalty. The drawbacks of coordinated checkpoint come from its synchronization cost at checkpoint and restart times. In this paper we implement, evaluate and compare the two kinds of protocols with a special emphasis on their respective performance according to fault frequency. The main conclusion (under our experimental conditions) is that message logging becomes relevant for a large scale cluster from one fault every hour for applications with large dataset.
Keyphrases
fault frequency message logging node failure special emphasis fault tolerance approach grid deployment main conclusion restart time uncoordinated checkpoint large cluster experimental condition large scale cluster significant message transfer penalty fault free execution adopted programming model synchronization cost transparent one low overhead respective performance many protocol large dataset coordinated checkpoint
