Characterizing Deep-Learning I/O Workloads in TensorFlow
October 06, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· π 2018 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Parallel Data Storage & Data Intensive Scalable Computing Systems (PDSW-DISCS)
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Steven W. D. Chien, Stefano Markidis, Chaitanya Prasad Sishtla, Luis Santos, Pawel Herman, Sai Narasimhamurthy, Erwin Laure
arXiv ID
1810.03035
Category
cs.DC: Distributed Computing
Citations
55
Venue
2018 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Parallel Data Storage & Data Intensive Scalable Computing Systems (PDSW-DISCS)
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
The performance of Deep-Learning (DL) computing frameworks rely on the performance of data ingestion and checkpointing. In fact, during the training, a considerable high number of relatively small files are first loaded and pre-processed on CPUs and then moved to accelerator for computation. In addition, checkpointing and restart operations are carried out to allow DL computing frameworks to restart quickly from a checkpoint. Because of this, I/O affects the performance of DL applications. In this work, we characterize the I/O performance and scaling of TensorFlow, an open-source programming framework developed by Google and specifically designed for solving DL problems. To measure TensorFlow I/O performance, we first design a micro-benchmark to measure TensorFlow reads, and then use a TensorFlow mini-application based on AlexNet to measure the performance cost of I/O and checkpointing in TensorFlow. To improve the checkpointing performance, we design and implement a burst buffer. We find that increasing the number of threads increases TensorFlow bandwidth by a maximum of 2.3x and 7.8x on our benchmark environments. The use of the tensorFlow prefetcher results in a complete overlap of computation on accelerator and input pipeline on CPU eliminating the effective cost of I/O on the overall performance. The use of a burst buffer to checkpoint to a fast small capacity storage and copy asynchronously the checkpoints to a slower large capacity storage resulted in a performance improvement of 2.6x with respect to checkpointing directly to slower storage on our benchmark environment.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Distributed Computing
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Reproducing GW150914: the first observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
MXNet: A Flexible and Efficient Machine Learning Library for Heterogeneous Distributed Systems
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Adaptive Federated Learning in Resource Constrained Edge Computing Systems
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Edge Intelligence: Paving the Last Mile of Artificial Intelligence with Edge Computing
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
iFogSim: A Toolkit for Modeling and Simulation of Resource Management Techniques in Internet of Things, Edge and Fog Computing Environments
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted