Skip to main content

Insights into Parallelism with Intensive Knowledge Sharing

  • Conference paper
Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 8656))

Abstract

Novel search space splitting techniques have recently been successfully exploited to paralleliz Constraint Programming and Mixed Integer Programming solvers. We first show how universal hashing can be used to extend one such interesting approach to a generalized setting that goes beyond discrepancy-based search, while still retaining strong theoretical guarantees. We then explain that such static or explicit splitting approaches are not as effective in the context of parallel combinatorial search with intensive knowledge acquisition and sharing such as parallel SAT, where implicit splitting through clause sharing appears to dominate. Furthermore, we show that in a parallel setting there exists a surprising tradeoff between the well-known communication cost for knowledge sharing across multiple compute nodes and the so far neglected cost incurred by the computational load per node. We provide experimental evidence that one can successfully exploit this tradeoff and achieve reasonable speedups in parallel SAT solving beyond 16 cores.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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. Aigner, M., Biere, A., Kirsch, C.M., Niemetz, A., Preiner, M.: Analysis of portfolio-style parallel SAT solving on current multi-core architectures. In: POS-2013: Intl. Workshop on Pragmatics of SAT, Helsinki, Finland (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Audemard, G., Hoessen, B., Jabbour, S., Lagniez, J.-M., Piette, C.: Revisiting clause exchange in parallel sat solving. In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 200–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Predicting learnt clauses quality in modern SAT solvers. In: 21st IJCAI, Pasadena, CA, pp. 399–404 (July 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balint, A., Belov, A., Heule, M., Järvisalo, M.: SAT competition (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bellare, M., Goldreich, O., Petrank, E.: Uniform generation of NP-witnesses using an NP-oracle. Information and Computation 163(2), 510–526 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Biere, A.: Lingeling, Plingeling and Treengeling entering the SAT Competition 2013. In: Proc. of SAT Competition 2013, Univ. of Helsinki. Dept. of Computer Science Series of Publications B, vol. B-2013-1, pp. 51–52 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bloom, B., Grove, D., Herta, B., Sabharwal, A., Samulowitz, H., Saraswat, V.: SatX10: A scalable plug&play parallel SAT framework - (tool presentation). In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 463–468. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Bordeaux, L., Hamadi, Y., Samulowitz, H.: Experiments with massively parallel constraint solving. In: 21st IJCAI, pp. 443–448 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chakraborty, S., Meel, K.S., Vardi, M.Y.: A scalable and nearly uniform generator of SAT witnesses. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 608–623. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Chu, G., Schulte, C., Stuckey, P.J.: Confidence-based work stealing in parallel constraint programming. In: Gent, I.P. (ed.) CP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5732, pp. 226–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Ermon, S., Gomes, C., Sabharwal, A., Selman, B.: Taming the curse of dimensionality: Discrete integration by hashing and optimization. In: 30th ICML, pp. 334–342 (June 2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ermon, S., Gomes, C., Sabharwal, A., Selman, B.: Low-density parity constraints for hashing-based discrete integration. In: 31st ICML (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fischetti, M., Monaci, M., Salvagnin, D.: Self-splitting of workload in parallel computation (May 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gomes, C.P., Sabharwal, A., Selman, B.: Model counting: A new strategy for obtaining good bounds. In: 21st AAAI, Boston, MA, pp. 54–61 (July 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hamadi, Y., Wintersteiger, C.M.: Seven challenges in parallel sat solving. In: 26th AAAI (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Harvey, W.D., Ginsberg, M.L.: Limited discrepancy search. In: 14th IJCAI, Montreal, Canada, pp. 607–615 (August 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heule, M., Kullmann, O., Wieringa, S., Biere, A.: Cube and conquer: Guiding cdcl sat solvers by lookaheads. In: Eder, K., Lourenço, J., Shehory, O. (eds.) HVC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7261, pp. 50–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. IBM ILOG. IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio 12.6 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Katsirelos, G., Sabharwal, A., Samulowitz, H., Simon, L.: Resolution and parallelizability: Barriers to the efficient parallelization of sat solvers. In: 27th AAAI (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kumar, S., Mamidala, A.R., Faraj, D., Smith, B., Blocksome, M., Cernohous, B., Miller, D., Parker, J., Ratterman, J., Heidelberger, P., Chen, D., Steinmacher-Burrow, B.: PAMI: A parallel active message interface for the Blue Gene/Q supercomputer. In: IPDPS-2012: 26th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium, pp. 763–773 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Michel, L., See, A., Hentenryck, P.V.: Transparent parallelization of constraint programming. INFORMS Journal on Computing 21(3), 363–382 (2009)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Moisan, T., Gaudreault, J., Quimper, C.-G.: Parallel discrepancy-based search. In: Schulte, C. (ed.) CP 2013. LNCS, vol. 8124, pp. 30–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Moisan, T., Quimper, C.-G., Gaudreault, J.: Parallel depth-bounded discrepancy search. In: Simonis, H. (ed.) CPAIOR 2014. LNCS, vol. 8451, pp. 377–393. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Plaza, S.M., Markov, I.L., Bertacco, V.: Low-latency sat solving on multicore processors with priority scheduling and xor partitioning. In: International Workshop on Logic Synthesis (IWLS) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Régin, J.-C., Rezgui, M., Malapert, A.: Embarrassingly parallel search. In: Schulte, C. (ed.) CP 2013. LNCS, vol. 8124, pp. 596–610. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Rolf, C.C., Kuchcinski, K.: Load-balancing methods for parallel and distributed constraint solving. In: IEEE Conf. on Cluster Computing, pp. 304–309 (September 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shinano, Y., Achterberg, T., Berthold, T., Heinz, S., Koch, T.: ParaSCIP – a parallel extension of SCIP. In: Competence in High Performance Computing 2010, pp. 135–148. Springer (February 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stuckey, P.J.: Lazy clause generation: Combining the power of SAT and CP (and MIP?) solving. In: Lodi, A., Milano, M., Toth, P. (eds.) CPAIOR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6140, pp. 5–9. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Valiant, L.G., Vazirani, V.V.: NP is as easy as detecting unique solutions. Theoretical Comput. Sci. 47(3), 85–93 (1986)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. van der Tak, P., Heule, M., Biere, A.: Concurrent cube-and-conquer - (poster presentation). In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 475–476. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhang, H., Bonacina, M.P., Hsiang, J.: PSATO: a distributed propositional prover and its application to quasigroup problems. J. Symb. Comput. 21(4), 543–560 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Cache performance of SAT solvers: a case study for efficient implementation of algorithms. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 287–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sabharwal, A., Samulowitz, H. (2014). Insights into Parallelism with Intensive Knowledge Sharing. In: O’Sullivan, B. (eds) Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. CP 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8656. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10428-7_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10428-7_48

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10427-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10428-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics