September 2010

The first computer bug, a moth found trapped in a relay in the Mark II computer, was pasted into a daily log book by Grace Hopper.

Being in the right place, at the right time is certainly a key to success. So, perhaps it’s fair to ask if tools to debug exascale applications will significantly lag the availability of the new architectures, delaying the broader usefulness of a precious resource. After all, a great many things have to be in place for efficient debugging to be made possible. Debugger developers will need to be invited to the table at the earliest stages in order to make their requirements known. They require access to the architecture and need to know the number and nature of the cores and the role of special purpose processors. They need to know the programming model and require a compiler and OS that have the right hooks to the debugger itself, and more. Beyond these “basics” are the formidable tasks of ensuring acceptable performance and creating interfaces that make the tool useful, perhaps even intuitive, providing assistance in the interpretation of unprecedented complexity.

Even given these requirements and the early stage of exascale development, developers are moving ahead with debugger concepts in the hopes of arriving at the station in time to help the exascale ultra-express depart on schedule. In this article, we ask what an exascale debugger might look like. Will it really be different from your now average, run of the mill, petascale debugger, or the charmingly old-fashioned terascale one your wacky uncle Lou used to let you play with in the lab on the weekends?

 

Dracott on Intel's Exascale Labs in Europe

by Mike Bernhardt

Richard Dracott, unwinding on the water.

In our last issue, The Exascale Report broke the news that Richard Dracott, formerly the GM of Intel's High Performance Computing organization, was taking a temporary position as the Acting Director of Intel's European exascale labs. Under Dracott’s leadership, Intel’s presence, or maybe we should say, saturation, among the Top 500, grew from  262 spots in 2006 to the current number of 406 entries. We are pleased to bring you this feature interview with Richard Dracott.
 

If They Build It, Who Will Run It?

by Mike Bernhardt

Tero Tuoronen and Christopher Hanke, heavy computing specialists in front of the Finnish It Center for Science Cray XT5.

There is a growing sentiment in the U.S. that it is losing ground in technology leadership and a national exascale initiative is called for. While we’ve seen some signs of commitment and funding, such as the U.S. Department of Energy’s early funding for the International Exascale Software Project, and more recently, the “Exascale Co-Design Center” solicitation, there is clearly no multi-agency collaboration at the level of what we are seeing in Europe. It does seem that the lack of a national initiative with well coordinated, collaborative organizations and significant and steady funding is placing the U.S. at a disadvantage. In fact, I recently heard this from a colleague: “I became aware of seven exascale positions over the past month, and six of them were in Europe.” What's going on here: is HPC leadership quietly slipping out of the United States?
 

European Exascale Software Initiative Workshop

by Staff

The European Exascale Software Initiative (EESI) is building a European vision (contrast this with the International vision of the IESP) and roadmap to address the software and applications challenges that exascale (and other extreme scale computers) will present.

They have announced a one-day workshop in Amsterdam in early November.

Former NCSA science chief says no exascale future

by Staff

During a recent talk at TeraGrid '10, Bob Wilhelmson, retired chief science officer of NCSA and former applications lead for the Blue Waters project, gave an overview of the Blue Waters architecture and a look at some of the early applications expected on the machine.

Near the end of his talk he presented a challenge we couldn't resist passing on:

“I’ll make a claim,” he told the TG’10 audience. “There will be no general purpose exascale machine ever built that anyone can afford to operate, much less buy.”

UHPC Revisited: An Interview with DARPA Program Manager Bill Harrod

by John Kirkley

Part of Charles Babbage's Difference Engine assembled after his death by Babbage's son, using parts found in his laboratory.

Bill Harrod, program manger for the DARPA Ubiquitous High Performance Computing (UHPC) program has a clear vision of what the agency hopes to accomplish with this ambitious effort. Responding to questions posed by The Exascale Report, he details the program's goals, the key challenges facing the vendors that have been awarded contracts to tackle various aspects of the development, and the risks involved. DARPA is also introducing a new concept: an open collaborative research environment.
 

Join the Discussion

The Exascale Report encourages members of the HPC community to contribute articles dealing with key issues and technologies associated with the drive to develop exascale systems. Please submit a brief (150-250 word abstract) to idea@theexascalereport.com describing your proposed topic. We welcome original submissions from HPC practitioners. Articles will be peer reviewed.

Please note that success stories, white papers, press releases and other marketing communications collateral or public relations materials are not what we are looking for.