MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407385487 · doi:10.14778/3696435.3696437

CUTTANA: Scalable Graph Partitioning for Faster Distributed Graph Databases and Analytics

2024· article· en· W4407385487 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Rezaei Hajidehi, Sraavan Sridhar, Margo Seltzer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityGraph databaseAnalyticsGraphDatabaseTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graph partitioning plays a pivotal role in various distributed graph processing applications, including graph analytics, graph neural network training, and distributed graph databases. A "good" graph partitioner reduces workload execution time, worker imbalance, and network overhead. Graphs that require distributed settings are often too large to fit in the main memory of a single machine. This challenge renders traditional in-memory graph partitioners infeasible, leading to the emergence of streaming solutions. Streaming partitioners produce lower-quality partitions, because they work from partial information and must make premature decisions before they have a complete view of a vertex's neighborhood. We introduce CUTTANA, a streaming graph partitioner that partitions massive graphs (Web/Twitter scale) with superior quality compared to existing streaming solutions. CUTTANA uses a novel buffering technique that prevents the premature assignment of vertices to partitions and a scalable coarsening and refinement technique that enables a complete graph view, improving the intermediate assignment made by a streaming partitioner. We implemented a parallel version for CUTTANA that offers nearly the same partitioning latency as existing streaming partitioners. Our experimental analysis shows that CUTTANA consistently yields better partitioning quality than state-of-the-art streaming vertex partitioners in terms of both edge-cut and communication volume metrics. We also evaluate the workload latencies that result from using CUTTANA and other partitioners in distributed graph analytics and databases. CUTTANA outperforms the other methods in most scenarios (algorithms, datasets). In analytics applications, CUTTANA improves runtime performance by up to 59% compared to various streaming partitioners (i.e., HDRF, Fennel, Ginger, HeiStream). In graph database tasks, CUTTANA results in higher query throughput by up to 23%, without hurting tail latency.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207