Source author record

Harsha Rastogi

Harsha Rastogi appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Understanding Data Storage and Ingestion for Large-Scale Deep Recommendation Model Training

Datacenter-scale AI training clusters consisting of thousands of domain-specific accelerators (DSA) are used to train increasingly-complex deep learning models. These clusters rely on a data storage and ingestion (DSI) pipeline, responsible for storing exabytes of training data and serving it at tens of terabytes per second. As DSAs continue to push training efficiency and throughput, the DSI pipeline is becoming the dominating factor that constrains the overall training performance and capacity. Innovations that improve the efficiency and performance of DSI systems and hardware are urgent, demanding a deep understanding of DSI characteristics and infrastructure at scale. This paper presents Meta's end-to-end DSI pipeline, composed of a central data warehouse built on distributed storage and a Data PreProcessing Service that scales to eliminate data stalls. We characterize how hundreds of models are collaboratively trained across geo-distributed datacenters via diverse and continuous training jobs. These training jobs read and heavily filter massive and evolving datasets, resulting in popular features and samples used across training jobs. We measure the intense network, memory, and compute resources required by each training job to preprocess samples during training. Finally, we synthesize key takeaways based on our production infrastructure characterization. These include identifying hardware bottlenecks, discussing opportunities for heterogeneous DSI hardware, motivating research in datacenter scheduling and benchmark datasets, and assimilating lessons learned in optimizing DSI infrastructure.

preprint2015arXiv

The Blacklisting Memory Scheduler: Balancing Performance, Fairness and Complexity

In a multicore system, applications running on different cores interfere at main memory. This inter-application interference degrades overall system performance and unfairly slows down applications. Prior works have developed application-aware memory schedulers to tackle this problem. State-of-the-art application-aware memory schedulers prioritize requests of applications that are vulnerable to interference, by ranking individual applications based on their memory access characteristics and enforcing a total rank order. In this paper, we observe that state-of-the-art application-aware memory schedulers have two major shortcomings. First, such schedulers trade off hardware complexity in order to achieve high performance or fairness, since ranking applications with a total order leads to high hardware complexity. Second, ranking can unfairly slow down applications that are at the bottom of the ranking stack. To overcome these shortcomings, we propose the Blacklisting Memory Scheduler (BLISS), which achieves high system performance and fairness while incurring low hardware complexity, based on two observations. First, we find that, to mitigate interference, it is sufficient to separate applications into only two groups. Second, we show that this grouping can be efficiently performed by simply counting the number of consecutive requests served from each application. We evaluate BLISS across a wide variety of workloads/system configurations and compare its performance and hardware complexity, with five state-of-the-art memory schedulers. Our evaluations show that BLISS achieves 5% better system performance and 25% better fairness than the best-performing previous scheduler while greatly reducing critical path latency and hardware area cost of the memory scheduler (by 79% and 43%, respectively), thereby achieving a good trade-off between performance, fairness and hardware complexity.