MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386528681 · doi:10.14778/3611540.3611548

Towards General and Efficient Online Tuning for Spark

2023· article· en· W4386528681 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Li, Huaijun Jiang, Yu Shen, Yide Fang, Xiaofeng Yang, Danqing Huang, Xinyi Zhang, Wentao Zhang, Ce Zhang, Peng Chen, Bin Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersTencent
KeywordsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)SPARK (programming language)GeneralityBayesian optimizationProcess (computing)Distributed computingCloud computingComputer engineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributed data analytic system - Spark is a common choice for processing massive volumes of heterogeneous data, while it is challenging to tune its parameters to achieve high performance. Recent studies try to employ auto-tuning techniques to solve this problem but suffer from three issues: limited functionality, high overhead, and inefficient search. In this paper, we present a general and efficient Spark tuning framework that can deal with the three issues simultaneously. First, we introduce a generalized tuning formulation, which can support multiple tuning goals and constraints conveniently, and a Bayesian optimization (BO) based solution to solve this generalized optimization problem. Second, to avoid high overhead from additional offline evaluations in existing methods, we propose to tune parameters along with the actual periodic executions of each job (i.e., online evaluations). To ensure safety during online job executions, we design a safe configuration acquisition method that models the safe region. Finally, three innovative techniques are leveraged to further accelerate the search process: adaptive sub-space generation, approximate gradient descent, and meta-learning method. We have implemented this framework as an independent cloud service, and applied it to the data platform in Tencent. The empirical results on both public benchmarks and large-scale production tasks demonstrate its superiority in terms of practicality, generality, and efficiency. Notably, this service saves an average of 57.00% memory cost and 34.93% CPU cost on 25K in-production tasks within 20 iterations, respectively.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207