Characterization and Architectural Implications of Big Data Workloads

TL;DR

This paper characterizes big data workloads, revealing their data movement dominance, high front-end stalls, and the impact of software stacks on processor efficiency, based on a reduced set of representative workloads.

Contribution

It reduces 77 big data workloads to 17 representative ones and provides a detailed micro-architectural comparison with traditional workloads.

Findings

Big data workloads are data movement dominated with high branch operations.

Hadoop and Spark workloads exhibit higher front-end stalls.

Software stack complexity significantly affects processor efficiency.

Abstract

Big data areas are expanding in a fast way in terms of increasing workloads and runtime systems, and this situation imposes a serious challenge to workload characterization, which is the foundation of innovative system and architecture design. The previous major efforts on big data benchmarking either propose a comprehensive but a large amount of workloads, or only select a few workloads according to so-called popularity, which may lead to partial or even biased observations. In this paper, on the basis of a comprehensive big data benchmark suite---BigDataBench, we reduced 77 workloads to 17 representative workloads from a micro-architectural perspective. On a typical state-of-practice platform---Intel Xeon E5645, we compare the representative big data workloads with SPECINT, SPECCFP, PARSEC, CloudSuite and HPCC. After a comprehensive workload characterization, we have the following observations. First, the big data workloads are data movement dominated computing with more branch operations, taking up to 92% percentage in terms of instruction mix, which places them in a different class from Desktop (SPEC CPU2006), CMP (PARSEC), HPC (HPCC) workloads. Second, corroborating the previous work, Hadoop and Spark based big data workloads have higher front-end stalls. Comparing with the traditional workloads i. e. PARSEC, the big data workloads have larger instructions footprint. But we also note that, in addition to varied instruction-level parallelism, there are significant disparities of front-end efficiencies among different big data workloads. Third, we found complex software stacks that fail to use state-of-practise processors efficiently are one of the main factors leading to high front-end stalls. For the same workloads, the L1I cache miss rates have one order of magnitude differences among diverse implementations with different software stacks.