TL;DR
This paper evaluates the parallel computing capabilities of four FaaS platforms, revealing that architectural differences significantly impact their suitability for highly-parallel applications, with virtualization and scheduling being key factors.
Contribution
It provides a comparative framework and empirical analysis of FaaS architectures, highlighting how virtualization and scheduling affect parallel performance.
Findings
AWS and IBM perform well for parallel tasks
Azure faces challenges with high parallelism
Lighter virtualization and proactive scheduling enhance parallelism
Abstract
Serverless computing has seen a myriad of work exploring its potential. Some systems tackle Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) properties on automatic elasticity and scale to run highly-parallel computing jobs. However, they focus on specific platforms and convey that their ideas can be extrapolated to any FaaS runtime. An important question arises: do all FaaS platforms fit parallel computations? In this paper, we argue that not all of them provide the necessary means to host highly-parallel applications. To validate our hypothesis, we create a comparative framework and categorize the architectures of four cloud FaaS offerings, emphasizing parallel performance. We attest and extend this description with an empirical experiment that consists in plotting in deep detail the evolution of a parallel computing job on each service. The analysis of our results evinces that FaaS is not inherently…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
