Hi Alessandra,
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Alessandra Forti wrote:
> size of the site is manually inserted in the BDII. I agree in ECDF it is
> variable but you really should put a meaningful value that averages to a
> meaningful HS06 number. I thought you did that but ECDF is red again. This
> time APEL is bigger than ATLAS. You seem to change the capacity in the BDII
> every month [1] can you confirm that? You should put values whose ratio is
> ~HS06 you publish.
>
No, I don't think it was changed every month. It was changed in October to
make it consistent between the 2 numbers we report and to reflect the
current worker node systems we run on (ringfenced nodes, general ECDF
cluster, Openstack - all with different HepSpec and job slots/cores).
(see below)
This value should reflect the different systems we are running on in very
good approximation now.
> aforti@vm7>site=UKI-SCOTGRID-ECDF; ldapsearch -LLL -x -h
> top-bdii.tier2.hep.manchester.ac.uk:2170 -b
> "mds-vo-name=${site},mds-vo-name=local,o=grid" | perl -p00e 's/\r?\n
> //g'|egrep -i 'bench|spec|logical'
> GlueHostBenchmarkSF00: 0
> GlueHostBenchmarkSI00: 0
> objectClass: GlueHostBenchmark
> GlueHostProcessorOtherDescription: Cores=8, Benchmark=12.9-HEP-SPEC06
> GlueSubClusterLogicalCPUs: 528
>
That's the updated correct one. It was updated in October, so I think we
should wait for the November numbers once the whole month is over.
Cores and Hepspec are averaged over the different systems taking the
different number of cores/machines into account we really run on.
> ATM REBUS reports weird stuff not corresposnding to 12.9
>
> October: 111945/9570 =11. 69 <-- atlas claims 11.884 until August included
> September: 74195/7040 = 10.54 <-- atlas see 10.5 from September onward in
> line with this numbers
> October: 76167/7291=10.44 <-- similar enough
> November: 6811/528 = 12.89 <-- this is ok if ATLAS sees it, but I suspect
> numbers are not updated that often and it might be a discrepancy again.
>
Atlas sees 10.5 because that's what we my mistake reported. We didn't
updated the Glue value and only the one for APEL when we added
new worker nodes. 10.5 was the wrong, too low value.
Since we updated now the APEL and GLUE value to be consistent, there
should be no reason/possibility that ATLAS sees something different for
November.
> so there are 3 points here
>
> 1) Do you update your numbers to maintain the HS06 ratio in the BDII
> consistently? I don't think changing numbers monthly is a good idea but they
> should at least match the HS06 value.
No, we don't change monthly.
We only looked into it because of the discrepancy you reported and found
that a) that the 2 different values we report, Apel and Glue one, are not
consisten with each other, b) both don't reflect the new hardware we are
running on since a while for the SL6 analysis queue.
That's why it was changed in October. Before I think the last change was
in July when we got new machines to run on (differently configured for job
slots than our ringfenced nodes which made a change neccessary)
The change in October reflected the addition of the Openstack nodes for
the SL6 queue.
> 2) If you do that why rebus is reporting a different set of numbers for
> example I'd expect Ocotber 7291*12.9 = 94053 not 76167
We don't do that.
It was changed in October, so probably that's why it's different since it
was not the same for the whole month?
I would expect that November onwards it should now correspond to 12.9
> 3) ATLAS doesn't seem to update the HS06 often enough to have such frequent
> changes. And TBF most sites usually don't change their size every month.
>
As I said, we also don't do that.
I think we should wait until the end of October to see if it will be green
then and consistent.
In any case, we will look through the published data using the scripts you
published to make sure it will be consistent in the future.
Cheers,
Marcus
> [2] http://tinyurl.com/j2fylyx
>
> On 17/11/2016 12:05, Marcus Ebert wrote:
>> Thanks Alessandra,
>>
>> I think I understand now, also from previous discussions in the list here.
>> Basically, it only tests if 2 values published by a site, both defined in
>> the bdii and put in manually by the site, agree or not, but doesn't say
>> anything about the correctness of the HEPSPEC value used.
>> So it seems what really meaningfully can be compared is just the wallclock
>> work from Atlas and APEL, if it's not scaled at a site.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better then to split the plot in 2 different ones,
>> - one for the ratio of wallclock hours Atlas/APEL to have a site check
>> that both values published are consistent, and
>> - second one only for the wallclock work ratio Atlas/APEL to see any
>> differences between the reported wallclock work in APEL and the ATLAS
>> records?
>>
>> If it shows for example "red" right now, it's not obvious just from the
>> plot which of the 2 numbers are the problem.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Marcus
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2016, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Marcus,
>> >
>> > > Thanks, I think I nearly understand it now. To fully understand,
>> > could you please explain how HS06 in Atlas wallclock work is determined?
>> > It isn't the same that > is used in APEL wallclock work, is it?
>> >
>> > the presentation I gave yesterday at the HEPSYSMAN gives the details
>> >
>> > https://indico.cern.ch/event/577279/contributions/2353919/attachments/1367099/2071452/20161107_hepsysman-accounting.pdf
>> >
>> >
>> > in the specific today I've also started an FAQ
>> >
>> > https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LCG/AccountingFAQ#How_are_the_ATLAS_numbers_in_SSB
>> >
>> >
>> > cheers
>> > alessandra
>> >
>> > On 01/11/2016 09:52, Marcus Ebert wrote:
>> > > Hi Alessandra,
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 1 Nov 2016, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > > I'm not sure if I understand it or if it makes sense that way:
>> > > > > Basically what you are saying is that the initial number values
>> > > > > "HS06 on the atlas dashboard, HS06 in APEL, ratio, wallclock
>> > > in > > ATLAS,
>> > > > > wallclock in APEL, wallclock ratio"
>> > > > > are really
>> > > > > "wallclock work in the Atlas, wallclock work in APEL, ratio, >
>> > > > wallclock
>> > > > > work in Atlas (unscaled), wallclock work in APEL (maybe
>> > > > > scaled)",
>> > > > > isn't it?
>> > > > the fields are
>> > > > > ATLAS wallclock work (HS06*hours), APEL wallclock work
>> > > (HS06*hours), > ratio, ATLAS wallclock (hours), APEL wallclock (hours
>> > > maybe internally > scale), ratio
>> > > >
>> > > Thanks, I think I nearly understand it now. To fully understand, could
>> > > you
>> > > please explain how HS06 in Atlas wallclock work is determined? It
>> > > isn't
>> > > the same that is used in APEL wallclock work, is it?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Marcus
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
|