Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1911))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This note is an elaboratin of a panel presentation, and is meant as a constructive critique of ESP. It should be remembered that the bottom line is that ESP is a big step in an important direction – otherwise we wouldn’t bother with this discussion...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. D. H. Bailey, E. Barszcz, L. Dagum, and H. D. Simon, “NAS parallel benchmark results≓. IEEE Trans. Parallel & Distributed Syst. 1(1), pp. 43–51, Feb 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  2. G. Cybenko, L. Kipp, L. Pointer, and D. Kuck, “Supercomputer performance evaluation and the Perfect Benchmarks≓. In Intl. Conf. Supercomputing, pp. 254– 266, Jun 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. J. Dongarra, “Performance of various computers using standard linear equations software≓. Comput. Arch. News 18(1), pp. 17–31, Mar 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. B. Downey and D. G. Feitelson, “The elusive goal of workload characterization≓. Perf. Eval. Rev. 26(4), pp. 14–29, Mar 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. G. Feitelson and A. Mu’alem Weil, “Utilization and predictabilityin scheduling the IBM SP2 with back.lling≓. In 12th Intl. Parallel Processing Symp., pp. 542–546, Apr1998. A Critique of ESP 73

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. P. Jones and B. Nitzberg, “Scheduling for parallel supercomputing: a historical perspective of achievable utilization≓. In Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph (eds.), pp. 1–16, Springer-Verlag, 1999. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. vol. 1659.

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. P. Singh, W-D. Weber, and A. Gupta, “SPLASH: Stanford parallel applications for shared-memory≓. Comput. Arch. News 20(1), pp. 5–44, Mar 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. A. Wong, L. Oliker, W. Kramer, T. Kaltz, and D. Bailey, “System utilization benchmark on the CrayT3E and IBM SP2≓. In Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing, D. G. Feitelson and L. Rudolph (eds.), p. 58–70, Springer Verlag, 2000. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. vol. 1911.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Feitelson, D.G. (2000). A Critique of ESP. In: Feitelson, D.G., Rudolph, L. (eds) Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing. JSSPP 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1911. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-39997-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-39997-6_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41120-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39997-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics