Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “parallel file system”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1996

Flexibility and Performance of Parallel File Systems

As we gain experience with parallel file systems, it becomes increasingly clear that a single solution does not suit all applications. For example, it appears to be impossible to find a single appropriate interface, caching policy, file structure, or disk-management strategy. Furthermore, the proliferation of file-system interfaces and abstractions make applications difficult to port. We propose that the traditional functionality of parallel file systems be separated into two components: a fixed core that is standard on all platforms, encapsulating only primitive abstractions and interfaces, and a set of high-level libraries to provide a variety of abstractions and application-programmer interfaces (API's). We present our current and next-generation file systems as examples of this structure. Their features, such as a three-dimensional file structure, strided read and write interfaces, and I/O-node programs, are specifically designed with the flexibility and performance necessary to support a wide range of applications.

Kotz, David↗
NASA NTRS1999

KNBD: A Remote Kernel Block Server for Linux

I am developing a prototype of a Linux remote disk block server whose purpose is to serve as a lower level component of a parallel file system. Parallel file systems are an important component of high performance supercomputers and clusters. Although supercomputer vendors such as SGI and IBM have their own custom solutions, there has been a void and hence a demand for such a system on Beowulf-type PC Clusters. Recently, the Parallel Virtual File System (PVFS) project at Clemson University has begun to address this need (1). Although their system provides much of the functionality of (and indeed was inspired by) the equivalent file systems in the commercial supercomputer market, their system is all in user-space. Migrating their 10 services to the kernel could provide a performance boost, by obviating the need for expensive system calls. Thanks to Pavel Machek, the Linux kernel has provided the network block device (2) with kernels 2.1.101 and later. You can configure this block device to redirect reads and writes to a remote machine's disk. This can be used as a building block for constructing a striped file system across several nodes.

Becker, Jeff↗
NASA NTRS1996

The Galley Parallel File System

As the I/O needs of parallel scientific applications increase, file systems for multiprocessors are being designed to provide applications with parallel access to multiple disks. Many parallel file systems present applications with a conventional Unix-like interface that allows the application to access multiple disks transparently. The interface conceals the parallelism within the file system, which increases the ease of programmability, but makes it difficult or impossible for sophisticated programmers and libraries to use knowledge about their I/O needs to exploit that parallelism. Furthermore, most current parallel file systems are optimized for a different workload than they are being asked to support. We introduce Galley, a new parallel file system that is intended to efficiently support realistic parallel workloads. We discuss Galley's file structure and application interface, as well as an application that has been implemented using that interface.

Nieuwejaar, Nils↗
NASA NTRS1996

Performance of the Galley Parallel File System

As the input/output (I/O) needs of parallel scientific applications increase, file systems for multiprocessors are being designed to provide applications with parallel access to multiple disks. Many parallel file systems present applications with a conventional Unix-like interface that allows the application to access multiple disks transparently. This interface conceals the parallism within the file system, which increases the ease of programmability, but makes it difficult or impossible for sophisticated programmers and libraries to use knowledge about their I/O needs to exploit that parallelism. Furthermore, most current parallel file systems are optimized for a different workload than they are being asked to support. We introduce Galley, a new parallel file system that is intended to efficiently support realistic parallel workloads. Initial experiments, reported in this paper, indicate that Galley is capable of providing high-performance 1/O to applications the applications that rely on them. In Section 3 we describe that access data in patterns that have been observed to be common.

Nieuwejaar, Nils↗
DOE OSTI2024

Formal Definitions and Performance Comparison of Consistency Models for Parallel File Systems

The semantics of HPC storage systems are defined by the consistency models to which they abide. Storage consistency models have been less studied than their counterparts in memory systems, with the exception of the POSIX standard and its strict consistency model. The use of POSIX consistency imposes a performance penalty that becomes more significant as the scale of parallel file systems increases and the access time to storage devices, such as node-local solid storage devices, decreases. While some efforts have been made to adopt relaxed storage consistency models, these models are often defined informally and ambiguously as by-products of a particular implementation. Here in this work, we establish a connection between memory consistency models and storage consistency models and revisit the key design choices of storage consistency models from a high-level perspective. Further, we propose a formal and unified framework for defining storage consistency models and a layered implementation that can be used to easily evaluate their relative performance for different I/O workloads. Finally, we conduct a comprehensive performance comparison of two relaxed consistency models on a range of commonly seen parallel I/O workloads, such as checkpoint/restart of scientific applications and random reads of deep learning applications. We demonstrate that for certain I/O scenarios, a weaker consistency model can significantly improve the I/O performance. For instance, in small random reads that are typically found in deep learning applications, session consistency achieved a 5x improvement in I/O bandwidth compared to commit consistency, even at small scales.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2004

[PVFS 2000: An operational parallel file system for Beowulf]

The approach has been to develop Parallel Virtual File System version 2 (PVFS2) , retaining the basic philosophy of the original file system but completely rewriting the code. It shows the architecture of the server and client components. BMI - BMI is the network abstraction layer. It is designed with a common driver and modules for each protocol supported. The interface is non-blocking, and provides mechanisms for optimizations including pinning user buffers. Currently TCP/IP and GM(Myrinet) modules have been implemented. Trove -Trove is the storage abstraction layer. It provides for storing both data spaces and name/value pairs. Trove can also be implemented using different underlying storage mechanisms including native files, raw disk partitions, SQL and other databases. The current implementation uses native files for data spaces and Berkeley db for name/value pairs.

Ligon, Walt↗
NASA NTRS1996

The Galley Parallel File System

Most current multiprocessor file systems are designed to use multiple disks in parallel, using the high aggregate bandwidth to meet the growing I/0 requirements of parallel scientific applications. Many multiprocessor file systems provide applications with a conventional Unix-like interface, allowing the application to access multiple disks transparently. This interface conceals the parallelism within the file system, increasing the ease of programmability, but making it difficult or impossible for sophisticated programmers and libraries to use knowledge about their I/O needs to exploit that parallelism. In addition to providing an insufficient interface, most current multiprocessor file systems are optimized for a different workload than they are being asked to support. We introduce Galley, a new parallel file system that is intended to efficiently support realistic scientific multiprocessor workloads. We discuss Galley's file structure and application interface, as well as the performance advantages offered by that interface.

Nieuwejaar, Nils↗
DOE OSTI2024

Collection of Disk Failure Events from Alpine, the Parallel File System for Summit Supercomputer

This dataset contains disk (HDD) failure events collected from the Alpine storage system of the Summit supercomputer, hosted at OLCF, spanning from January 4, 2019, to December 21, 2023 (a total of 4 years, 11 months, and 18 days), covering 89% of its operational lifetime. It includes 3,766 disk failure events, each recorded with its detection timestamp (in ISO 8601 format) and detailed by its location within the storage system - rack, enclosure, and drive slot number.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2012

High-Performance, Multi-Node File Copies and Checksums for Clustered File Systems

Modern parallel file systems achieve high performance using a variety of techniques, such as striping files across multiple disks to increase aggregate I/O bandwidth and spreading disks across multiple servers to increase aggregate interconnect bandwidth. To achieve peak performance from such systems, it is typically necessary to utilize multiple concurrent readers/writers from multiple systems to overcome various singlesystem limitations, such as number of processors and network bandwidth. The standard cp and md5sum tools of GNU coreutils found on every modern Unix/Linux system, however, utilize a single execution thread on a single CPU core of a single system, and hence cannot take full advantage of the increased performance of clustered file systems. Mcp and msum are drop-in replacements for the standard cp and md5sum programs that utilize multiple types of parallelism and other optimizations to achieve maximum copy and checksum performance on clustered file systems. Multi-threading is used to ensure that nodes are kept as busy as possible. Read/write parallelism allows individual operations of a single copy to be overlapped using asynchronous I/O. Multinode cooperation allows different nodes to take part in the same copy/checksum. Split-file processing allows multiple threads to operate concurrently on the same file. Finally, hash trees allow inherently serial checksums to be performed in parallel. Mcp and msum provide significant performance improvements over standard cp and md5sum using multiple types of parallelism and other optimizations. The total speed-ups from all improvements are significant. Mcp improves cp performance over 27x, msum improves md5sum performance almost 19x, and the combination of mcp and msum improves verified copies via cp and md5sum by almost 22x. These improvements come in the form of drop-in replacements for cp and md5sum, so are easily used and are available for download as open source software at http://mutil.sourceforge.net.

Kolano, Paul Z.↗
NASA NTRS1995

File-access characteristics of parallel scientific workloads

Phenomenal improvements in the computational performance of multiprocessors have not been matched by comparable gains in I/O system performance. This imbalance has resulted in I/O becoming a significant bottleneck for many scientific applications. One key to overcoming this bottleneck is improving the performance of parallel file systems. The design of a high-performance parallel file system requires a comprehensive understanding of the expected workload. Unfortunately, until recently, no general workload studies of parallel file systems have been conducted. The goal of the CHARISMA project was to remedy this problem by characterizing the behavior of several production workloads, on different machines, at the level of individual reads and writes. The first set of results from the CHARISMA project describe the workloads observed on an Intel iPSC/860 and a Thinking Machines CM-5. This paper is intended to compare and contrast these two workloads for an understanding of their essential similarities and differences, isolating common trends and platform-dependent variances. Using this comparison, we are able to gain more insight into the general principles that should guide parallel file-system design.

Nieuwejaar, Nils↗
DOE OSTI2025

Leveraging Pre-Built Catalogs and Object-Level Scheduling to Eliminate I/O Bottlenecks in HPC Environments

Modern High-Performance Computing (HPC) environments face mounting challenges due to the shift from large to small file datasets, along with an increasing number of users and parallelized applications. As HPC systems rely on Parallel File Systems (PFS), such as Lustre for data processing, performance bottlenecks stemming from Object Storage Target (OST) contention have become a significant concern. Existing solutions, such as LADS with its object-level scheduling approach, fall short in large-scale HPC environments due to their inability to effectively address metadata I/O bottlenecks and the growing number of I/O processes. This study highlights the pressing need for a comprehensive solution that tackles both OST contention and metadata I/O challenges in diverse HPC workloads. To address these challenges, we propose SwiftLoad, an object-level I/O scheduling framework that leverages a metadata catalog to enhance the performance and efficiency of parallel HPC utilities. The adoption of the metadata catalog mitigates the metadata I/O bottlenecks that commonly occur in HPC utilities, a challenge that is particularly pronounced in object-level I/O scheduling. SwiftLoad addresses OST contention and the uneven distribution of I/O processes across different OSTs through mathematical modeling and incorporates a Loader Configuration Module to regulate the number of I/O processes. Evaluated with two representative utilities—data deduplication profiling and data augmentation—SwiftLoad achieved performance improvements of up to 5.63x and 11.0x, respectively, on a production supercomputer.

HPC↗
DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Node Program Fuzzing on High Performance Computing Resources

Significant effort is placed on tuning the internal parameters of fuzzers to explore the state space, measured as coverage, of binaries. In this work, we investigate the effects of the external environment on the resulting coverage after fuzzing two binaries with AFL for 24 hours. Parameters such as scaling to multiple nodes, node saturation, and parallel file system type on HPC resources are controlled in order to maximize coverage. It will be shown that employing a parallel file system such as IBM's General Parallel File System offers an advantage for fuzzing operations, since it contains enhancements for performance optimization. When combined with scaling to two and four nodes, while simultaneously restricting the number of coordinated AFL tasks per node on the low end (10-50% of available physical cores), coverage may be enhanced within a shorter period of time. Thus, controlling the external environment is a useful effort.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1995

Characterizing parallel file-access patterns on a large-scale multiprocessor

High-performance parallel file systems are needed to satisfy tremendous I/O requirements of parallel scientific applications. The design of such high-performance parallel file systems depends on a comprehensive understanding of the expected workload, but so far there have been very few usage studies of multiprocessor file systems. This paper is part of the CHARISMA project, which intends to fill this void by measuring real file-system workloads on various production parallel machines. In particular, we present results from the CM-5 at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications. Our results are unique because we collect information about nearly every individual I/O request from the mix of jobs running on the machine. Analysis of the traces leads to various recommendations for parallel file-system design.

Purakayastha, A.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Management and Storage of Scientific Data

Scientific discoveries rely heavily on efficient access, search, and management of massive data sets. Data management technologies have, for decades, provided foundational capabilities for scientific computing. Just as storage, input/output (I/O), and data management have been fundamental to simulation-based science for many years, so too are capable data-management technologies key to the success of today’s scientific workflows utilizing data intensive and machine learning (ML) techniques. The Department of Energy, Office of Science, Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program has invested broadly in data-management research focused on high-performance computing (HPC) systems, from parallel file systems that store data to application software that makes these systems more productive. Still, advances in technology combined with growing diversity of supported science strongly motivate continued investment in this area. In January 2022, ASCR convened a workshop to identify priority research directions in the area of data management for high-performance and scientific computing. Attendees were challenged to identify promising approaches that would support the breadth of the DOE mission, including the explosion of artificial intelligence (AI) uses and the growing needs of experimental and observational science. Technological and science drivers were identified and considered as they relate to key aspects of data management such as interfaces, architectural design, and FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). The thoughts of the workshop participants were distilled into a set of four priority research directions with the potential for high impact on DOE science. These research directions are summarized in the following pages.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗