Is Your Graph Algorithm Eligible for Nondeterministic Execution?

Zhiyuan Shao, Ling Hou, Yang Ai, Yu Zhang, Hai Jin
{"title":"Is Your Graph Algorithm Eligible for Nondeterministic Execution?","authors":"Zhiyuan Shao, Ling Hou, Yang Ai, Yu Zhang, Hai Jin","doi":"10.1109/ICPP.2015.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Graph algorithms are used to implement data mining tasks on graph data-sets. Besides conducting the algorithms by the default deterministic manner, some graph processing frameworks, especially those supporting asynchronous execution model, provide interfaces for the algorithms to be executed in nondeterministic manner, which can improve the scalability and performance of the algorithm's executions. However, is the graph algorithm eligible for nondeterministic execution, and will the execution produce expected results? The literature gives few answers to these questions. In this paper, we study the nondeterministic execution of graph algorithms by considering the scenario where data dependences happen in the edges in graph processing frameworks that employ asynchronous execution model. Our study reveals that only by guaranteeing the atomicity of individual reads and writes, some algorithms (e.g., Graph traversal algorithms) can converge by recovering from corrupted intermediate results with nondeterministic execution, and thus tolerate even write-write conflicts, while some other algorithms (e.g., Fixed point iteration algorithms) can converge but tolerate only read-write conflicts. By conducting graph algorithms on real-world graphs in Graph Chi, and comparing their performances and results with deterministic executions, we find that their performance gains are generally scalable to the available processors with nondeterministic executions, and the results at convergence of fixed point iteration algorithms from nondeterministic executions exhibit larger variances from one run to another than their deterministic executions.","PeriodicalId":423007,"journal":{"name":"2015 44th International Conference on Parallel Processing","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 44th International Conference on Parallel Processing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPP.2015.52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Graph algorithms are used to implement data mining tasks on graph data-sets. Besides conducting the algorithms by the default deterministic manner, some graph processing frameworks, especially those supporting asynchronous execution model, provide interfaces for the algorithms to be executed in nondeterministic manner, which can improve the scalability and performance of the algorithm's executions. However, is the graph algorithm eligible for nondeterministic execution, and will the execution produce expected results? The literature gives few answers to these questions. In this paper, we study the nondeterministic execution of graph algorithms by considering the scenario where data dependences happen in the edges in graph processing frameworks that employ asynchronous execution model. Our study reveals that only by guaranteeing the atomicity of individual reads and writes, some algorithms (e.g., Graph traversal algorithms) can converge by recovering from corrupted intermediate results with nondeterministic execution, and thus tolerate even write-write conflicts, while some other algorithms (e.g., Fixed point iteration algorithms) can converge but tolerate only read-write conflicts. By conducting graph algorithms on real-world graphs in Graph Chi, and comparing their performances and results with deterministic executions, we find that their performance gains are generally scalable to the available processors with nondeterministic executions, and the results at convergence of fixed point iteration algorithms from nondeterministic executions exhibit larger variances from one run to another than their deterministic executions.
你的图算法适合不确定执行吗?
图算法用于在图数据集上实现数据挖掘任务。除了以默认的确定性方式执行算法外,一些图形处理框架,特别是支持异步执行模型的框架,还提供了以非确定性方式执行算法的接口,从而提高了算法执行的可扩展性和性能。然而,图算法是否适合不确定的执行,执行是否会产生预期的结果?文献几乎没有给出这些问题的答案。本文通过考虑采用异步执行模型的图处理框架中数据依赖发生在边缘的情况,研究了图算法的不确定性执行。我们的研究表明,只有通过保证单个读写的原子性,一些算法(如图遍历算法)才能通过不确定执行的损坏中间结果恢复收敛,从而容忍甚至写-写冲突,而另一些算法(如定点迭代算法)可以收敛但只容忍读写冲突。通过在graph Chi中对真实世界的图形执行图算法,并将其性能和结果与确定性执行进行比较,我们发现它们的性能增益通常可扩展到具有非确定性执行的可用处理器,并且不确定性执行的固定点迭代算法的收敛结果在每次运行与另一次运行之间表现出比确定性执行更大的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信