Wait Analysis of Distributed Systems Using Kernel Tracing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a new class of profiler for distributed and heterogeneous systems. In these systems, a task may wait for the result of another task, either locally or remotely. Such wait dependencies are invisible to instruction profilers. We propose a host-based, precise method to recover recursively wait causes across machines, using blocking as the fundamental mechanism to detect changes in the control flow. It relies solely on operating system events, namely scheduling, interrupts and network events. It is therefore capable of observing kernel threads interactions and achieves user-space runtime independence. Given a task, the algorithm computes its active path from the trace, which is presented in an interactive viewer for inspection. We validated our new method with workloads representing major architecture and operating conditions found in distributed programs. We then used our method to analyze the execution behavior of five different distributed systems. We found that the worst case tracing overhead for a distributed application is 18 percent and that the typical average overhead is about 5 percent. The analysis implementation has linear runtime according to the trace size.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it