@article {932,
	title = {Scheduling Computational Workflows on Failure-prone Platforms},
	journal = {International Journal of Networking and Computing},
	volume = {6},
	number = {1},
	year = {2016},
	pages = {2-26},
	abstract = {We study the scheduling of computational workflows on compute resources that experience exponentially distributed failures. When a failure occurs, rollback and recovery is used to resume the execution from the last checkpointed state. The scheduling problem is to minimize the expected execution time by deciding in which order to execute the tasks in the workflow and deciding for each task whether to checkpoint it or not after it completes. We give a polynomialtime optimal algorithm for fork DAGs (Directed Acyclic Graphs) and show that the problem is NP-complete with join DAGs. We also investigate the complexity of the simple case in which no task is checkpointed. Our main result is a polynomial-time algorithm to compute the expected execution time of a workflow, with a given task execution order and specified to-be-checkpointed tasks. Using this algorithm as a basis, we propose several heuristics for solving the scheduling problem. We evaluate these heuristics for representative workflow configurations.},
	keywords = {checkpointing, fault-tolerance, reliability, scheduling, workflow},
	issn = { 2185-2847},
	author = {Guillaume Aupy and Anne Benoit and Henri Casanova and Yves Robert}
}
@techreport {684,
	title = {On the Combination of Silent Error Detection and Checkpointing},
	journal = {UT-CS-13-710},
	year = {2013},
	month = {2013-06},
	publisher = {University of Tennessee Computer Science Technical Report},
	abstract = {In this paper, we revisit traditional checkpointing and rollback recovery strategies, with a focus on silent data corruption errors. Contrarily to fail-stop failures, such latent errors cannot be detected immediately, and a mechanism to detect them must be provided. We consider two models: (i) errors are detected after some delays following a probability distribution (typically, an Exponential distribution); (ii) errors are detected through some verification mechanism. In both cases, we compute the optimal period in order to minimize the waste, i.e., the fraction of time where nodes do not perform useful computations. In practice, only a fixed number of checkpoints can be kept in memory, and the first model may lead to an irrecoverable failure. In this case, we compute the minimum period required for an acceptable risk. For the second model, there is no risk of irrecoverable failure, owing to the verification mechanism, but the corresponding overhead is included in the waste. Finally, both models are instantiated using realistic scenarios and application/architecture parameters.},
	keywords = {checkpointing, error recovery, High-performance computing, silent data corruption, verification},
	url = {http://www.netlib.org/lapack/lawnspdf/lawn278.pdf},
	author = {Guillaume Aupy and Anne Benoit and Thomas Herault and Yves Robert and Frederic Vivien and Dounia Zaidouni}
}
