ArticleGigaScience2018
Hot-starting software containers for STAR aligner.
Article in GigaScience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ring Finger 149-Related Is an FGF/MAPK-Independent Regulator of Pharyngeal Muscle Fate Specification.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Genome-Wide mRNA and Long Non-Coding RNA Analysis of Porcine Trophoblast Cells Infected with Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus Associated with Reproductive Failure.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Oxidative Stress and Its Modulation by Ladostigil Alter the Expression of Abundant Long Non-Coding RNAs in SH-SY5Y Cells.Non-coding RNA · 2022Article
- Ladostigil Attenuates Induced Oxidative Stress in Human Neuroblast-like SH-SY5Y Cells.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Article
- Hot-starting software containers for STAR aligner.GigaScience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Using software containers has become standard practice to reproducibly deploy and execute biomedical workflows on the cloud. However, some applications that contain time-consuming initialization steps will produce unnecessary costs for repeated executions. Findings: We demonstrate that hot-starting from containers that have been frozen after the application has already begun execution can speed up bioinformatics workflows by avoiding repetitive initialization steps. We use an open-source tool called Checkpoint and Restore in Userspace (CRIU) to save the state of the containers as a collection of checkpoint files on disk after it has read in the indices. The resulting checkpoint files are migrated to the host, and CRIU is used to regenerate the containers in that ready-to-run hot-start state. As a proof-of-concept example, we create a hot-start container for the spliced transcripts alignment to a reference (STAR) aligner and deploy this container to align RNA sequencing data. We compare the performance of the alignment step with and without checkpoints on cloud platforms using local and network disks. Conclusions: We demonstrate that hot-starting Docker containers from snapshots taken after repetitive initialization steps are completed significantly speeds up the execution of the STAR aligner on all experimental platforms, including Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and local virtual machines. Our method can be potentially employed in other bioinformatics applications in which a checkpoint can be inserted after a repetitive initialization phase.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.