Our Objectives• Explore the applicability of Microsoft technologies to real world scientific domains with

a focus on data intensive applicationso Expect data deluge will demand multicore enabled data analysis/miningo Detailed objectives modified based on input from Microsoft such as interest in CCR,

Dryad and TPL• Evaluate and apply these technologies in demonstration systems

o Threading: CCR, TPLo Service model and workflow: DSS and Robotics toolkito MapReduce: Dryad/DryadLINQ compared to Hadoop and Azure o Classical parallelism: Windows HPCS and MPI.NET, o XNA Graphics based visualization

• Work performed using C#• Provide feedback to Microsoft• Broader Impact

o Papers, presentations, tutorials, classes, workshops, and conferenceso Provide our research work as services to collaborators and general science

community

Approach• Use interesting applications (working with domain experts) as benchmarks

including emerging areas like life sciences and classical applications such as particle physicso Bioinformatics - Cap3, Alu, Metagenomics, PhyloDo Cheminformatics - PubChemo Particle Physics - LHC Monte Carloo Data Mining kernels - K-means, Deterministic Annealing Clustering, MDS, GTM,

Smith-Waterman Gotoh• Evaluation Criterion for Usability and Developer Productivity

o Initial learning curveo Effectiveness of continuing developmento Comparison with other technologies

• Performance on both single systems and clusters

Major Achievements• Analysis of CCR and DSS within SALSA paradigm with very detailed performance work on

CCR • Detailed analysis of Dryad and comparison with Hadoop and MPI. Initial comparison

with Azure• Comparison of TPL and CCR approaches to parallel threading• Applications to several areas including particle physics and especially life sciences• Demonstration that Windows HPC Clusters can efficiently run large scale data intensive

applications• Development of high performance Windows 3D visualization of points from dimension

reduction of high dimension datasets to 3D. These are used as Cheminformatics and Bioinformatics dataset browsers

• Proposed extensions of MapReduce to perform datamining efficiently• Identification of datamining as important application with new parallel algorithms for

Multi Dimensional Scaling MDS, Generative Topographic Mapping GTM, and Clustering for cases where vectors are defined or where one only knows pairwise dissimilarities between dataset points.

• Extension of robust fast deterministic annealing to clustering (vector and pairwise), MDS and GTM.

8x1x

22x

1x4

4x1x

48x

1x4

16x1

x424

x1x4

2x1x

84x

1x8

8x1x

816

x1x8

24x1

x82x

1x16

4x1x

168x

1x16

16x1

x16

2x1x

244x

1x24

8x1x

2416

x1x2

424

x1x2

42x

1x32

4x1x

328x

1x32

16x1

x32

24x1

x32

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Concurrent Threading on CCR or TPL Runtime(Clustering by Deterministic Annealing for ALU 35339 data points)

CCR TPL

Parallel Patterns (Threads/Processes/Nodes)

Para

llel O

verh

ead

Typical CCR Comparison with TPL

• Hybrid internal threading/MPI as intra-node model works well on Windows HPC cluster• Within a single node TPL or CCR outperforms MPI for computation intensive applications like clustering of

Alu sequences (“all pairs” problem)• TPL outperforms CCR in major applications

Efficiency = 1 / (1 + Overhead)

1x1x1

2x1x1

2x1x2

4x1x1

1x4x2

2x2x2

4x1x2

4x2x1

1x8x2

2x8x1

8x1x2

1x24x1

4x4x2

1x8x6

2x4x6

4x4x3

24x1x2

2x4x8

8x1x8

8x1x1

0

24x1x4

4x4x8

1x24x8

24x1x1

2

24x1x1

6

1x24x2

4

24x1x2

80

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Clustering by Deterministic Annealing(Parallel Overhead = [PT(P) – T(1)]/T(1), where T time and P number of parallel units)

Parallel Patterns (ThreadsxProcessesxNodes)

Para

llel O

verh

ead

Thread

MPI

MPI

Thread

Thread

ThreadThread

MPI

Thread

ThreadMPIMPI

Threading versus MPI on nodeAlways MPI between nodes

• Note MPI best at low levels of parallelism• Threading best at Highest levels of parallelism (64 way breakeven)• Uses MPI.Net as a wrapper of MS-MPI

MPI

MPI

Biology MDS and Clustering Results

Alu Families

This visualizes results of Alu repeats from Chimpanzee and Human Genomes. Young families (green, yellow) are seen as tight clusters. This is projection of MDS dimension reduction to 3D of 35399 repeats – each with about 400 base pairs

Metagenomics

This visualizes results of dimension reduction to 3D of 30000 gene sequences from an environmental sample. The many different genes are classified by clustering algorithm and visualized by MDS dimension reduction

High Performance Data Visualization• Developed parallel MDS and GTM algorithm to visualize large and high-dimensional data• Processed 0.1 million PubChem data having 166 dimensions• Parallel interpolation can process up to 2M PubChem points

MDS for 100k PubChem data100k PubChem data having 166 dimensions are visualized in 3D space. Colors represent 2 clusters separated by their structural proximity.

GTM for 930k genes and diseasesGenes (green color) and diseases (others) are plotted in 3D space, aiming at finding cause-and-effect relationships.

GTM with interpolation for 2M PubChem data2M PubChem data is plotted in 3D with GTM interpolation approach. Red points are 100k sampled data and blue points are 4M interpolated points.

[3] PubChem project, http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

Applications using Dryad & DryadLINQ

• Perform using DryadLINQ and Apache Hadoop implementations• Single “Select” operation in DryadLINQ• “Map only” operation in Hadoop

CAP3 [1] - Expressed Sequence Tag assembly to re-construct full-length mRNA

Input files (FASTA)

Output files

CAP3 CAP3 CAP3

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Time to process 1280 files each with ~375 sequences

Aver

age

Tim

e (S

econ

ds) Hadoop

DryadLINQ

[4] X. Huang, A. Madan, “CAP3: A DNA Sequence Assembly Program,” Genome Research, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 868-877, 1999.

All-PairsUsing DryadLINQ

35339 500000

2000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

DryadLINQMPI

Calculate Pairwise Distances (Smith Waterman Gotoh)

125 million distances4 hours & 46 minutes

• Calculate pairwise distances for a collection of genes (used for clustering, MDS)• Fine grained tasks in MPI• Coarse grained tasks in DryadLINQ• Performed on 768 cores (Tempest Cluster)

[5] Moretti, C., Bui, H., Hollingsworth, K., Rich, B., Flynn, P., & Thain, D. (2009). All-Pairs: An Abstraction for Data Intensive Computing on Campus Grids. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems , 21, 21-36.

Hadoop/Dryad ComparisonInhomogeneous Data I

0 50 100 150 200 250 3001500

1550

1600

1650

1700

1750

1800

1850

1900

Randomly Distributed Inhomogeneous Data Mean: 400, Dataset Size: 10000

DryadLinq SWG Hadoop SWG Hadoop SWG on VM

Standard Deviation

Tim

e (s

)

Inhomogeneity of data does not have a significant effect when the sequence lengths are randomly distributedDryad with Windows HPCS compared to Hadoop with Linux RHEL on Idataplex (32 nodes)

Hadoop/Dryad ComparisonInhomogeneous Data II

0 50 100 150 200 250 3000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Skewed Distributed Inhomogeneous dataMean: 400, Dataset Size: 10000

DryadLinq SWG Hadoop SWG Hadoop SWG on VM

Standard Deviation

Tota

l Tim

e (s

)

This shows the natural load balancing of Hadoop MR dynamic task assignment using a global pipe line in contrast to the DryadLinq static assignmentDryad with Windows HPCS compared to Hadoop with Linux RHEL on Idataplex (32 nodes)

Cap3 Efficiency

•Ease of Use – Dryad/Hadoop are easier than EC2/Azure as higher level models•Lines of code including file copy

Azure : ~300 Hadoop: ~400 Dyrad: ~450 EC2 : ~700

Usability and Performance of Different Cloud Approaches

•Efficiency = absolute sequential run time / (number of cores * parallel run time)•Hadoop, DryadLINQ - 32 nodes (256 cores IDataPlex)•EC2 - 16 High CPU extra large instances (128 cores)•Azure- 128 small instances (128 cores)

Cap3 Performance

Instance Type Memory

EC2 compute

units

Actual CPU cores

Cost per hour

Cost per Core per

hour

Large (L) 7.5 GB 4 2 X (~2Ghz) 0.34$ 0.17$

Extra Large (XL) 15 GB 8 4 X

(~2Ghz) 0.68$ 0.17$

High CPU Extra Large (HCXL)

7 GB 20 8 X (~2.5Ghz) 0.68$ 0.09$

High Memory 4XL (HM4XL)

68.4 GB 26 8X

(~3.25Ghz) 2.40$ 0.3$

Tempest@IU 48GB n/a 24 1.62$ 0.07$

Table 1 : Selected EC2 Instance Types

Twister(MapReduce++)• Streaming based communication• Intermediate results are directly transferred

from the map tasks to the reduce tasks – eliminates local files

• Cacheable map/reduce tasks• Static data remains in memory

• Combine phase to combine reductions• User Program is the composer of

MapReduce computations• Extends the MapReduce model to iterative

computationsData Split

D MRDriver

UserProgram

Pub/Sub Broker Network

D

File System

M

R

M

R

M

R

M

R

Worker NodesM

R

D

Map Worker

Reduce Worker

MRDeamon

Data Read/Write

Communication

Reduce (Key, List<Value>)

Iterate

Map(Key, Value)

Combine (Key, List<Value>)

User Program

Close()

Configure()Staticdata

δ flow

Different synchronization and intercommunication mechanisms used by the parallel runtimes

Iterative Computations

K-means Matrix Multiplication

Performance of K-Means Parallel Overhead Matrix Multiplication