arXiv preprint ·

IOSage: Detecting HPC I/O Bottleneck Patterns to Guide LLM Recommendations

Mahdi Banisharif, Tabassum Mahmud, Ahmad Tarraf, Suren Byna and Ali Jannesari

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Distributed & Parallel ComputingMachine LearningPerformance

Abstract

HPC applications often leave much of their parallel file system's bandwidth unused, and turning their Darshan logs into concrete I/O fixes still requires a scarce I/O expert. Rule-based tools flag counters against thresholds set by experts, and in tools built on large language models (LLMs), such as ION and IOAgent, the LLM decides which bottlenecks a log contains. We present IOSage, in which a classifier trained on many labeled logs, not the LLM, makes that decision, since a single log gives an LLM no baseline for what is abnormal. The LLM receives the I/O bottleneck patterns the classifier detects, the job's configuration files, per-file Darshan evidence, and for each pattern a card built from benchmark training runs, and writes recommended changes. Applied by hand and measured in repeated paired runs, the changes IOSage names speed up median total wall time 4.38x for an openPMD kernel (4.02x on a second storage tier) and 1.42x for hourly WRF restarts. For 5 of the 6 application scenarios with a helpful change, IOSage with Claude Sonnet 4 names it, including the change for 10-minute WRF restarts (up to 1.93x faster); with GPT-4o and Llama 3.1 as well, the classifier and cards name more helpful changes than the LLM alone. On 78 benchmark test runs without a pattern, the LLM deciding alone proposes changes for 64; with the classifier, for 9. The classifier reaches 0.929 Micro-F1 on 488 labeled benchmark test runs (0.916 as the gate; 0.832 on the 158 from configurations and jobs outside training), above Drishti's rules, WisIO, and IOAgent's pipeline without its literature retrieval. On TraceBench's nine expert-labeled traces from production systems, it has the highest precision of the tools compared (0.82), with 2 false positives against 12 for the keyword-mapped LLM diagnoses shipped with TraceBench and 5 for Drishti, on the five issue labels that match registered patterns.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Distributed & Parallel Computing

Get the few papers worth your time in Distributed & Parallel Computing every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics