Track synthesis, materials and catalysis as it is published.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study evaluates the performance trade-offs of bridging cloud and HPC architectures by benchmarking Podman-containerized versus bare-metal execution of scientific software across multi-node CPU clusters. As large-scale scientific AI workflows increasingly demand hybrid cloud-HPC portability, containerization overhead can introduce severe, unexpected performance penalties. The authors show that container preparation latency often dominates short-task workflows, and that multi-node scaling efficiency is governed far more by build-time compilation flags and execution monitoring than container virtualization itself.
Containerizing HPC workloads trades away predictable runtime: container startup latency can eclipse actual compute time on short jobs, while unoptimized binary builds quietly cripple multi-node throughput.
Cloud computing and high-performance computing (HPC) typically follow different paradigms: cloud services are often orchestrated using Kubernetes, whereas HPC workloads are managed through batch schedulers such as Slurm. Growing demand for shared computational resources increases the need for interoperability between these environments. This study uses Podman as a user-accessible tool to benchmark quantum chemistry software distributed as precompiled executables. Containerized and on-system execution are compared across CPU-optimized builds and multiple compute nodes, without additional network optimizations. The results demonstrate that performance depends on software compilation, startup overhead, and execution configuration. Container preparation can dominate short-task workflows, while long-running calculations require monitoring of computational progress. These findings highlight the importance of workload-specific benchmarking and user-level monitoring when deploying scientific applications in containers on HPC systems.