Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Ponder: Online Prediction of Task Memory Requirements for Scientific Workflows

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2408.00047 v2 pith:HMTVED23 submitted 2024-07-31 cs.DC

classification cs.DC
keywords workflowsmemorypondertaskdifferentallocationsconsidersfailures
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Scientific workflows are used to analyze large amounts of data. These workflows comprise numerous tasks, many of which are executed repeatedly, running the same custom program on different inputs. Users specify resource allocations for each task, which must be sufficient for all inputs to prevent task failures. As a result, task memory allocations tend to be overly conservative, wasting precious cluster resources, limiting overall parallelism, and increasing workflow makespan. In this paper, we first benchmark a state-of-the-art method on four real-life workflows from the nf-core workflow repository. This analysis reveals that certain assumptions underlying current prediction methods, which typically were evaluated only on simulated workflows, cannot generally be confirmed for real workflows and executions. We then present Ponder, a new online task-sizing strategy that considers and chooses between different methods to cater to different memory demand patterns. We implemented Ponder for Nextflow and made the code publicly available. In an experimental evaluation that also considers the impact of memory predictions on scheduling, Ponder improves Memory Allocation Quality on average by 71.0% and makespan by 21.8% in comparison to a state-of-the-art method. Moreover, Ponder produces 93.8% fewer task failures.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Strategies to Measure Energy Consumption Using RAPL During Workflow Execution on Commodity Clusters

    cs.DC 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Four energy measurement methods were compared on Kubernetes with Nextflow; shell-script and plugin approaches are effective, but concurrent tasks require heuristics for per-task attribution.

Pith tools