commit 2c428126e5b64994b02f9ad1feedc8465d5950f3
parent ca3ff453c8990331b678b93bdd876118bfc034e7
Author: Ivan Gankevich <igankevich@ya.ru>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:37:40 +0300
Add comparison to codelet model.
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/head.tex b/src/head.tex
@@ -13,6 +13,22 @@ hardware errors or electricity outages.
\section{Related work}
-\cite{zuckerman2011using}
+Computational models similar to kernel hierarchy are described in a number of
+papers, but none of them includes hierarchy.
+
+In~\cite{zuckerman2011using} the authors describe codelet model for exascale
+machines. This model breaks a programme into small bits of functionality,
+called codelets, and dependencies between them. The programme represents
+directed graph, which is called well-behaved if forward progress of the
+programme is guaranteed. The feature that distingueshes our research with
+respect to some others, is the use of hierarchy as the only possible way of
+defining depedencies between objects, into which a programme is decomposed. The
+main advantage of hierarchy is trivial handling of object failures. In
+contrast, in codelet model hierarchical depedencies are not enforced, and
+resilience to failures is provided by object migration and relies on hardware
+fault detection mechanisms. Furthermore, execution of kernel hierarchiies in
+our model resembles stack-based execution of ordinary programmes: the programme
+finishes only when all subordinate kernels of the main kernel finish. So, there
+is no need to define well-behaved graph to guarantee programme termination.
\cite{meneses2015using}
