A Performance Comparison of Dask and Apache Spark for Data-Intensive Neuroimaging Pipelines

Mathieu Dugré, Valérie Hayot-Sasson, T. Glatard
{"title":"A Performance Comparison of Dask and Apache Spark for Data-Intensive Neuroimaging Pipelines","authors":"Mathieu Dugré, Valérie Hayot-Sasson, T. Glatard","doi":"10.1109/WORKS49585.2019.00010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past few years, neuroimaging has entered the Big Data era due to the joint increase in image resolution, data sharing, and study sizes. However, no particular Big Data engines have emerged in this field, and several alternatives remain available. We compare two popular Big Data engines with Python APIs, Apache Spark and Dask, for their runtime performance in processing neuroimaging pipelines. Our evaluation uses two synthetic pipelines processing the 81GB BigBrain image, and a real pipeline processing anatomical data from more than 1,000 subjects. We benchmark these pipelines using various combinations of task durations, data sizes, and numbers of workers, deployed on an 8-node (8 cores ea.) compute cluster in Compute Canada's Arbutus cloud. We evaluate PySpark's RDD API against Dask's Bag, Delayed and Futures. Results show that despite slight differences between Spark and Dask, both engines perform comparably. However, Dask pipelines risk being limited by Python's GIL depending on task type and cluster configuration. In all cases, the major limiting factor was data transfer. While either engine is suitable for neuroimaging pipelines, more effort needs to be placed in reducing data transfer time.","PeriodicalId":436926,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE/ACM Workflows in Support of Large-Scale Science (WORKS)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE/ACM Workflows in Support of Large-Scale Science (WORKS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/WORKS49585.2019.00010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

In the past few years, neuroimaging has entered the Big Data era due to the joint increase in image resolution, data sharing, and study sizes. However, no particular Big Data engines have emerged in this field, and several alternatives remain available. We compare two popular Big Data engines with Python APIs, Apache Spark and Dask, for their runtime performance in processing neuroimaging pipelines. Our evaluation uses two synthetic pipelines processing the 81GB BigBrain image, and a real pipeline processing anatomical data from more than 1,000 subjects. We benchmark these pipelines using various combinations of task durations, data sizes, and numbers of workers, deployed on an 8-node (8 cores ea.) compute cluster in Compute Canada's Arbutus cloud. We evaluate PySpark's RDD API against Dask's Bag, Delayed and Futures. Results show that despite slight differences between Spark and Dask, both engines perform comparably. However, Dask pipelines risk being limited by Python's GIL depending on task type and cluster configuration. In all cases, the major limiting factor was data transfer. While either engine is suitable for neuroimaging pipelines, more effort needs to be placed in reducing data transfer time.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数据密集型神经成像管道中Dask和Apache Spark的性能比较
在过去的几年里,由于图像分辨率、数据共享和研究规模的共同提高,神经影像学进入了大数据时代。然而,在这个领域还没有特别的大数据引擎出现,还有一些替代方案可供选择。我们比较了两种流行的使用Python api的大数据引擎,Apache Spark和Dask,它们在处理神经成像管道方面的运行时性能。我们的评估使用两个合成管道处理81GB的BigBrain图像,一个真实管道处理来自1000多名受试者的解剖数据。我们使用任务持续时间、数据大小和工作人员数量的各种组合对这些管道进行基准测试,这些管道部署在compute Canada的Arbutus云中的8节点(8核)计算集群上。我们将PySpark的RDD API与Dask的Bag、Delayed和Futures进行比较。结果表明,尽管Spark和Dask之间存在细微差异,但这两个引擎的性能相当。然而,根据任务类型和集群配置,任务管道可能会受到Python GIL的限制。在所有情况下,主要的限制因素是数据传输。虽然这两种引擎都适用于神经成像管道,但在减少数据传输时间方面需要付出更多的努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Codesign Framework for Online Data Analysis and Reduction On a Parallel Spark Workflow for Frequent Itemset Mining Based on Array Prefix-Tree A Top-Down Performance Analysis Methodology for Workflows: Tracking Performance Issues from Overview to Individual Operations Comparing GPU Power and Frequency Capping: A Case Study with the MuMMI Workflow Provenance Data in the Machine Learning Lifecycle in Computational Science and Engineering
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1