Workload Scheduling in Distributed Stream Processors using Graph Partitioning
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
With ever increasing data volumes, large compute clusters that process data in a distributed manner have become prevalent in industry. For distributed stream processing platforms (such as Storm) the question of how to distribute workload to available machines, has important implications for the overall performance of the system. We present a workload scheduling strategy that is based on a graph partitioning algorithm. The scheduler is application agnostic: it collects the communication behavior of running applications and creates the schedules by partitioning the resulting communication graph using the METIS graph partitioning software. As we build upon graph partitioning algorithms that have been shown to scale to very large graphs, our approach can cope with topologies with millions of tasks. While the experiments in this paper assume static data loads, our approach could also be used in a dynamic setting. We implemented our proposed algorithm for the Storm stream processing system and evaluated it on a commodity cluster with up to 80 machines. The evaluation was conducted on four different use cases – three using synthetic data loads and one application that processes real data. We compared our algorithm against two state-of-the-art scheduler implementations and show that our approach offers significant improvements in terms of resource utilization, enabling higher throughput at reduced network loads. We show that these improvements can be achieved while maintaining a balanced workload in terms of CPU usage and bandwidth consumption across the cluster. We also found that the performance advantage increases with message size, providing an important insight for stream-processing approaches based on micro-batching.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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