This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Composite Synchronization in Parallel Discrete-Event Simulation
May 2002 (vol. 13 no. 5)
pp. 433-446

This paper considers a technique for composing global (barrier-style) and local (channel scanning) synchronization protocols within a single parallel discrete-event simulation. Composition is attractive because it allows one to tailor the synchronization mechanism to the model being simulated. We first motivate the problem by showing the large performance gap that can be introduced by a mismatch of model and synchronization method. Our solution calls for each channel between submodels to be classified as synchronous or asynchronous. We mathematically formulate the problem of optimally classifying channels and show that, in principle, the optimal classification can be obtained in time proportional to max C {x log C, V x N}, where C is the number of channels, V the number of unique minimal delays on those channels, and N is the number of submodels. We then demonstrate an implementation which finds an optimal solution at runtime and consider its performance on network topologies, including one of the global internet at the autonomous system level. We find that the automated method effectively determines channel assignments that maximize performance.

[1] R. Ayani, “A Parallel Simulation Scheme Based on Distances between Objects,” Distributed Simulation 1989, pp. 113-118, 1989.
[2] K.M. Chandy and J. Misra, “Distributed Simulation: A Case Study in Design and Verification of Distributed Programs,” IEEE Trans. on Software Eng., vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 440-452, Sept. 1979.
[3] J. Cowie, A. Ogielski, and D. Nicol, “Modeling the Global Internet,” Computing in Science and Eng., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 42-50, Jan./Feb. 1999.
[4] H. Davis, S. Goldschmidt, and J. Hennessy, “Multiprocessor Simulation and Tracing Using Tango,” Proc. 1991 Int'l Conf. Parallel Processing, pp. II99-II107, Aug. 1991.
[5] P. Dickens, P. Heidelberger, and D. Nicol, "Parallelized Direct Execution Simulation of Message-Passing Parallel Programs," IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol. 7, No. 10, Oct. 1996, pp. 1090-1105.
[6] A. Ferscha, “Parallel and Distributed Simulation of Discrete Event Systems,” Parallel and Distributed Computing Handbook, 1995.
[7] R. Fujimoto, “Parallel Discrete Event Simulation,” Comm. ACM, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 30-53, Oct. 1990.
[8] B. Premore, J. Liu, D. Nicol, and A. Poplawski, “Performance Prediction of a Parallel Simulator,” Proc. 1999 Parallel and Distributed Simulation Conf., 1999.
[9] J. Liu and D. Nicol, “Learning Not to Share,” Proc. 2000 Parallel and Distributed Simulation Conf., May 2001.
[10] J. Liu, K. Tan, and D. Nicol, “Lock-Free Scheduling of Logical Processes in Parallel Discrete-Event Simulation,” Proc. 2000 Parallel and Distributed Simulation Conf., May 2001.
[11] Y.-H. Low, C.-C. Lim, W. Cai, S.-Y. Huang, W.-J. Hsu, S. Jain, and S. Turner, “Survey of Languages and Runtime Libraries for Parallel Discrete-Event Simulation,” Simulation, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 170-186, Mar. 1999.
[12] B.D. Lubachevsky, “Efficient Distributed Event-Driven Simulations of Multiple-Loop Networks,” Comm. ACM, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 111–131, Jan. 1989.
[13] D.M. Nicol, “The Cost of Conservative Synchronization in Parallel Discrete-Event Simulations,” J. ACM, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 304–333, Apr. 1993
[14] D. Nicol, “Principles of Conservative Synchronization,” Proc. 1996 Winter Simulation Conf., pp. 128-135, Dec. 1996.
[15] D. Nicol and P. Heidelberger, “A Comparative Studey of Parallel Algorithms for Simulating Continuous Time Markov Chains,” ACM Trans. Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 326-354, Oct. 1995.
[16] D. Nicol and P. Heidelberger, “Parallel Execution for Serial Simulators,” ACM Trans. Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 210-242, July 1996.
[17] D.M. Nicol and R.M. Fujimoto, “Parallel Simulation Today,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 53, pp. 249-286, Dec. 1994.
[18] A. Poplawski and D. Nicol, “An Investigation of Out-of-Core Parallel Discrete-Event Simulation,” Proc. 1999 Winter Simulation Conf., pp. 524-530, 1999.
[19] H. Rajaei, R. Ayani, and L.E. Thorelli, "The Local Time Warp Approach to Parallel Simulation," R. Bagrodia and D. Jefferson, eds., Proc. Seventh Workshop Parallel and Distributed Simulation, pp. 119-126,Los Alamitos, Calif.: IEEE CS Press, 1993.
[20] S.K. Reinhardt, M.D. Hill, J.R. Larus, A.R. Lebeck, J.C. Lewis, and D.A. Wood, "The Wisconsin Wind Tunnel: Virtual Prototyping of Parallel Computers," Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS Conf. Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pp. 48-60, ACM, May 1993.
[21] L.M. Sokol, D.P. Briscoe, and A.P. Wieland, “MTW: A Strategy for Scheduling Discrete Simulation Events for Concurrent Execution,” Proc. SCS Multiconf. Distributed Simulation, pp. 34-42, 1988.
[22] S.J. Turner and M.Q. Xu, “Performance Evaluation of the Bounded Time Warp Algorithm,” Proc. Sixth Workshop Parallel and Distributed Simulation (PADS92), pp. 117-26, 1992.
[23] F. Wieland, “The Detailed Policy Assessment Tool (DPAT),” Proc. 1997 Spring INFORMS Conf., May 1997.
[24] Z. Xiao, B. Unger, R. Simmonds, and J. Cleary, “Scheduling Critical Channels in Conservative Parallel Discrete Event Simulation,” Proc. 13th Workshop Parallel and Distributed Simulation, pp. 20-28, 1999.

Index Terms:
Synchronization, simulation, parallel processing, performance, optimization.
David M. Nicol, Jason Liu, "Composite Synchronization in Parallel Discrete-Event Simulation," IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 433-446, May 2002, doi:10.1109/TPDS.2002.1003854
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.