{"about":{"site":"https://codewithpapers.app","non_affiliation":"Code with Papers and Syntology are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Papers with Code, Meta, or the pwc-archive mirror.","licence":"CC BY-SA 4.0","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","attribution":"https://codewithpapers.app/attribution","modified":"archive material modified by Syntology; see the attribution page"},"url":"/paper/quantifying-overheads-in-charm-and-hpx-using","title":"Quantifying Overheads in Charm++ and HPX using Task Bench","arxiv_id":"2207.12127","date":"2022-07-21","proceeding":null,"authors":["Nanmiao Wu","Ioannis Gonidelis","Simeng Liu","Zane Fink","Nikunj Gupta","Karame Mohammadiporshokooh","Patrick Diehl","Hartmut Kaiser","Laxmikant V. Kale"],"abstract":"Asynchronous Many-Task (AMT) runtime systems take advantage of multi-core architectures with light-weight threads, asynchronous executions, and smart scheduling. In this paper, we present the comparison of the AMT systems Charm++ and HPX with the main stream MPI, OpenMP, and MPI+OpenMP libraries using the Task Bench benchmarks. Charm++ is a parallel programming language based on C++, supporting stackless tasks as well as light-weight threads asynchronously along with an adaptive runtime system. HPX is a C++ library for concurrency and parallelism, exposing C++ standards conforming API. First, we analyze the commonalities, differences, and advantageous scenarios of Charm++ and HPX in detail. Further, to investigate the potential overheads introduced by the tasking systems of Charm++ and HPX, we utilize an existing parameterized benchmark, Task Bench, wherein 15 different programming systems were implemented, e.g., MPI, OpenMP, MPI + OpenMP, and extend Task Bench by adding HPX implementations. We quantify the overheads of Charm++, HPX, and the main stream libraries in different scenarios where a single task and multi-task are assigned to each core, respectively. We also investigate each system's scalability and the ability to hide the communication latency.","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.12127v1","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.12127v1.pdf","source":{"archive":"pwc-archive (Hugging Face), CC BY-SA 4.0","snapshot":"2025-07-28","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","row_kind":"links_only","authors_date_abstract":"arXiv metadata, CC0 1.0 (https://info.arxiv.org/help/license), from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12"},"code_links":[{"paper_slug":"quantifying-overheads-in-charm-and-hpx-using","repo_url":"https://github.com/StanfordLegion/task-bench","is_official":1,"mentioned_in_paper":0,"mentioned_in_github":0,"framework":"tf","reach":null}],"tasks":[],"methods":[],"datasets_introduced":[],"methods_introduced":[],"results":[],"syntology":{"syntology_url":null,"atlas_url":null,"mcp":null,"developers":"https://syntology.ai/developers"},"arxiv_metadata":null,"syntology_extracted_results":null}