Basic porting
This commit is contained in:
parent
43b3cdbd6e
commit
e22804fe2a
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
\documentclass{jhps}
|
||||
\documentclass{llncs}
|
||||
\usepackage{grffile}
|
||||
\usepackage{amssymb}
|
||||
\usepackage{mathtools}
|
||||
|
|
@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
|
|||
\usepackage{adjustbox}
|
||||
\usepackage{footnote}
|
||||
\usepackage{framed}
|
||||
\usepackage{cleveref}
|
||||
\usepackage{listings}
|
||||
\usepackage{subcaption}
|
||||
\usepackage[backend=bibtex, style=numeric]{biblatex}
|
||||
\addbibresource{bibliography.bib}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\usepackage{textcomp}
|
||||
%\usepackage{verbatim}
|
||||
\usepackage{adjustbox}
|
||||
|
|
@ -28,19 +35,16 @@
|
|||
|
||||
\begin{document}
|
||||
|
||||
\JHPSissue{0} % keep 0 until the issue is assigned
|
||||
\JHPSkeywords{performance analysis, monitoring, time series, job analysis} % add 2-5 keywords
|
||||
|
||||
% Author macro takes Name, Institution, Optional Link to the person, Optional Email
|
||||
\JHPSauthor{Julian Kunkel}{University of Reading\\Reading, UK}{https://hps.vi4io.org/about/people/julian_kunkel}{j.m.kunkel@reading.ac.uk}
|
||||
\JHPSauthor{Eugen Betke}{DKRZ\\Hamburg, Germany}{}{betke@dkrz.de} % use empty email here
|
||||
|
||||
\title{A Workflow for Identifying Jobs with Similar I/O Behavior Utilizing Time Series Analysis}
|
||||
\author{Julian Kunkel\inst{1} \and Eugen Betke\inst{2}}
|
||||
\institute{\vspace*{-1cm}}
|
||||
|
||||
% add the section numbers to the listings/figures/tables
|
||||
\counterwithin{lstlisting}{section}
|
||||
\counterwithin{figure}{section}
|
||||
\counterwithin{table}{section}
|
||||
\institute{
|
||||
Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
|
||||
\email{xxx}%
|
||||
\and
|
||||
ECMWF \email{eugen.betke@ecmwf.int}%
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\maketitle
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -989,91 +993,8 @@ Our next step is to foster a discussion in the community to identify and define
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection*{Acknowledgment} %% Remove this section if not needed
|
||||
\textit{We thank the reviewers.}
|
||||
\textit{We thank the reviewers for their constructive contributions.}
|
||||
|
||||
% The bibliography
|
||||
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Bibliography}
|
||||
\bibliography{bibliography.bib}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\reviews % The review section
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection*{Reviewer: Feiyi Wang, Date: 2020-07-07}
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Overall summary and proposal for acceptance}
|
||||
|
||||
The paper proposed the method of identifying jobs having an I/O pattern similar to a referenced job. The work could be an important contribution to the HPC community. The work takes three reference jobs and then finds out the jobs similar to the reference jobs from job pools. Jobs have been collected for six months in production operation, ca. 500K jobs.
|
||||
Overall, the paper should be accepted, provided that the authors answer the comments.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection*{Reviewer: \href{https://www.arcos.inf.uc3m.es/fjblas/}{Garcia-Blas Javier}, Date: 2021-05-17}
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Overall summary and proposal for acceptance}
|
||||
|
||||
The paper presents an experimental study of a methodology employed for identifying similarities between concurrent running applications in clusters, using the I/O pattern of them. The methodology aims to enable the adaptation of the system, allowing the optimization of the I/O subsystem. Additionally, this paper provides a novel method for calculating the similarity of I/O patterns.
|
||||
|
||||
The paper is well addressed and the topic interesting. The authors compared a significant amount of data to cope with the problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, I recommend this paper to be accepted.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Scope} % in regards to the journal, i.e., does the topic fit?
|
||||
|
||||
The paper fits the workshop’s topics.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Significance} % of the research, minor vs. major
|
||||
|
||||
Major.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Readability} % English and structure appropriate?
|
||||
|
||||
Good.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Presentation}
|
||||
|
||||
The paper presentation is good. The language and the paper structure is clear.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{References} % Correctly formatted?
|
||||
|
||||
Yes
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Correctness} % Is the research correct
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection*{Reviewer: Gorini Stefano Claudio, Date: 2021-05-18}
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Overall summary and proposal for acceptance}
|
||||
|
||||
The paper is presenting a methodology for identifying similarities in concurrent job running similar I/O pattern leveraging Kolmogorov-Smirnov algorithm to reduce the dimension to be considered (factor 2 simplification).The goal of optimizing the I/O subsystem could give fantastic benefit to a user that is willing to optimise his code. Considering the trend these days where data oriented workflows are predominant this work is definitively interesting.
|
||||
|
||||
The paper is well structured and the authors analyzed a conspicuous dataset giving the article a solid ground.
|
||||
|
||||
I do recommend this paper to be accepted.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Scope} % in regards to the journal, i.e., does the topic fit?
|
||||
|
||||
It is definitively in the scope of the workshop.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Significance} % of the research, minor vs. major
|
||||
|
||||
Major
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Readability} % English and structure appropriate?
|
||||
|
||||
Well written with perfect English and perfect structure.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Presentation}
|
||||
|
||||
Clear structure and optimal presentation following a very well set logical structure.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{References} % Correctly formatted?
|
||||
|
||||
Yes
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Correctness} % Is the research correct
|
||||
|
||||
Based on my knowledge I would say yes it is correct.
|
||||
\printbibliography%
|
||||
|
||||
\end{document}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue