next up previous contents index
Next: 7.2 Dynamically Triangulated Random Up: 7 Independent Parallelism Previous: 7 Independent Parallelism

7.1 Embarrassingly Parallel Problem Structure

In Chapters 4 and 6, we studied the synchronous problem class where the uniformity of the computation, that is, of the temporal structure, made the parallel implementation relatively straightforward. This chapter contains examples of the other major problem class, where the simple spatial structure leads to clear parallelization. We define the embarrassingly parallel  class of problems for which the computational graph  is disconnected. This spatial structure  allows a simple parallelization as no (temporal) synchronization is involved. In Chapters 4 and 6, on the other hand, there was often substantial synchronization and associated communication; however, the uniformity of the synchronization allowed a clear parallelization strategy. One important feature of embarrassingly parallel problems is the modest node-to-node communication requirements-the definition of no spatial connection implies in fact no internode communication, but a practical problem would involve some amount of communication, if only to set up the problem and accumulate results. The low communication requirements of embarrassingly parallel problems make them particularly suitable for a distributed computing implementation on a network of workstations; even the low bandwidth  of an Ethernet is often sufficient. Indeed, we used such a network of Sun workstations to support some of the simulations described in Section 7.2.

The caricature of this problem class, shown in Figure 7.1, uses a database problem as an example. This is illustrated in practice by the DOWQUEST program where a CM-2 supports searching of financial data contained in articles that are partitioned equally over the nodes of this SIMD machine [Waltz:87a;88a,90a].

Figure 7.1: Embarrassingly Parallel Problem Class

This problem class can have either a synchronous or asynchronous temporal structure.  We have illustrated the former above and analysis of a large (high energy) physics data set exhibits asynchronous temporal structure. Such experiments can record - separate events, which can be analyzed independently. However, each event is usually quite different and would require both distinct instruction streams and very different execution times. This was realized early in the high energy physics  community and so-called farms-initially of special-purpose machines and now of commercial workstations-have been used extensively for production data analysis  [Gaines:87a], [Hey:88a], [Kunz:81a].

The applications in Sections 7.2 and 7.6 obtain their embarrassingly parallel structure from running several full simulations-each with independent data. Each simulation could in fact also be decomposed spatially and in fact this spatial parallelization has since been pursued and is described for the neural network simulator in Section 7.6. Some of Chiu's random block lattice calculations also used an embarrassingly parallel approach with 1024 separate lattices being calculated on the 1024 nCUBE-1  at Sandia [Chiu:90a], [Fox:89i;89n]. This would not, of course, be possible for the QCD of Section 4.3, where each node would not be available to hold an interesting size lattice. The spatial parallelism in the examples of Sections 7.2 and 7.6 is nontrivial to implement as the irregularities makes these problems loosely synchronous. This relatively difficult domain parallelism made it attractive to first explore the independent structure gotten by exploiting the parallelism coming from simulations with different parameters.

It is interesting that Sections 6.3 and 7.3 both address simulations of spin systems relevant to high -depending on the algorithm used, one can get very different problem architectures  (either synchronous or embarrassingly parallel in this case) for a given application.

The embarrassingly parallel gravitational lens application of Section 7.4 was frustrating for the developers as it needed software support not available at the time on the Mark III. Suitable software (MOOSE in Section 15.2) had been developed on the Mark II to support graphics ray tracing  as briefly discussed in Section 14.1. Thus, the calculation is embarrassingly parallel, but a distributed database is essentially needed to support the calculation of each ray. This was not available in CrOS III at the time of the calculations described in Section 7.4.

next up previous contents index
Next: 7.2 Dynamically Triangulated Random Up: 7 Independent Parallelism Previous: 7 Independent Parallelism

Guy Robinson
Wed Mar 1 10:19:35 EST 1995