On 07/06/11 17:30, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>> instead which is 9.6 then Manchester's 3.5 becomes 7.5
>
> 7.5 is more correct than 3.5. It is a value at least between the hepspec
> range. Liverpool should perhaps check what they run on their
> T3 which isn't included in the value they are publishing.
For the last month or two, absolutely nothing.
John
> cheers
> alessandra
>
>
> On 07/06/2011 16:32, Steve Lloyd wrote:
>> Hi Alessandra,
>> HS06 Prod is arbitrarily normalised to the mean of HS06 ATLAS. This
>> is just a number common to all sites and doesn't affect the shares at
>> all because it cancels out. At the moment that factor is 4.5
>> (indicating Apel is lagging way behind). If I were to normalise it to
>> the mean of HS06 Apel (the next but one column) instead which is 9.6
>> then Manchester's 3.5 becomes 7.5. (HS06 Apel is dodgy as well because
>> for Liverpool it gives a bigger value than any they are publishing.
>> Also I wouldn't trust June yet).
>> The 4% is the change in overall score for Manchester that a 14%
>> change to HS06 would cause (31.8% of 14%). Others would also change so
>> it may actually be slightly more or less than this.
>> Cheers
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> + Steve Lloyd Queen Mary, University of
>> London +
>> + E-mail: [log in to unmask] School of
>> Physics +
>> + Phone: +44-(0)20-7882-5057 Mile End
>> Road +
>> + Fax: +44-(0)20-8981-9465 London E1 4NS,
>> UK +
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 Jun 2011, at 16:06, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> my point is that this is not a transparent method we asked over a
>>> year ago in RHUL. You are mixing and matching columns and trying to
>>> get out a single number that you can't get out. It might fix QMUL
>>> mismatch of cpu hours but it screws up other sites. HSAtlas is
>>> proportional to HSApel which depends heavily on where production jobs
>>> run. If you look at June Manchester figures HSApel is up to 8.1 so it
>>> is getting closer to the 8.8 value we publish while HS-Prod has
>>> dropped to a miserable 3.5. So at the moment we a falling down to
>>> 3.5/8.1=43% (i.e. 57% less). If I complete the move the difference
>>> might become even more dramatic.
>>>
>>>> As it only affects the Analysis and Production categories that's 4%
>>>> on the overall points score.
>>> The weights in the Atlas metrics table [1] give a 31.8%
>>> (35+35/220=31.8%) and if the cpu availability table gets excluded the
>>> weight will become higher. So I'm not sure where you get that 4%.
>>>
>>> But if it is really 4%, which means the CPU output counts almost 0,
>>> which is questionable then I see no point in changing in the middle
>>> of the accounting period to a method that is not well tested , not
>>> very well understood, nor widely recognised.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>> alessandra
>>>
>>> [1] http://pprc.qmul.ac.uk/~lloyd/gridpp/metrics.html
>>>
>>> On 07/06/2011 15:13, Steve Lloyd wrote:
>>>> Hi Alessandra,
>>>> Sorry I don't understand your point at all. I'm proposing to
>>>> switch from HS06 ATLAS to HS06 Prod (col 16 to 17) on
>>>> http://pprc.qmul.ac.uk/~lloyd/gridpp/hs06.html. It's actually 14%
>>>> for May now as I updated the Apel numbers. As it only affects the
>>>> Analysis and Production categories that's 4% on the overall points
>>>> score.
>>>> Cheers Steve
>>>> PS Also HS06 Prod is doesn't require an understanding of hyperthreading
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>
>>>> + Steve Lloyd Queen Mary, University of
>>>> London +
>>>> + E-mail: [log in to unmask] School of
>>>> Physics +
>>>> + Phone: +44-(0)20-7882-5057 Mile End
>>>> Road +
>>>> + Fax: +44-(0)20-8981-9465 London E1 4NS,
>>>> UK +
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7 Jun 2011, at 09:55, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No, Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>> it doesn't drop 10%. It drops 28% (25% if we want to use APEL HS).
>>>>> We have already discussed the fact that Atlas HS depends on the
>>>>> ration of cpu hours between Apel and Atlas and if the measures in
>>>>> Apel are not complete that affect HS-Atlas.
>>>>>
>>>>> HSAtlas= (CPUApel/CPUAtlas)*HS06.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which transforms your
>>>>>
>>>>> AnalysisHours*HSAtlas and ProdHours*HSAtlas in the orginal
>>>>> AnalysisHoursFrac*HS06 and ProdHoursFrac*HS06
>>>>>
>>>>> so it is 28% you are removing especially because I'm moving all
>>>>> production on the fastest CPUs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Atlas Kit and Hepspec are in line at 99% according to the papers
>>>>> widely accepted measures.
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers
>>>>> alessandra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/06/2011 09:47, Steve Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Alessandra,
>>>>>> I'm proposing to use the ATLAS production cpu/event as the
>>>>>> benchmark. In May switching from Apel to this would only make 10%
>>>>>> change to Manchester (6.8 -> 6.2). This also solves the problem
>>>>>> at Cambridge where there is no reliable Apel number. Although it
>>>>>> was discussed to drop the CPU availability column there was no
>>>>>> conclusion but investigations into Lancaster are still continuing.
>>>>>> It may be revisited. The proposal was to cap at 20% but this was
>>>>>> not agreed. Glasgow were above 20% but now QMUL has it's new disk
>>>>>> up no-one is. We don't know the total money that will be spent so
>>>>>> you can't translate this into £s.
>>>>>> Cheers Steve
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + Steve Lloyd Queen Mary, University
>>>>>> of London +
>>>>>> + E-mail: [log in to unmask] School of
>>>>>> Physics +
>>>>>> + Phone: +44-(0)20-7882-5057 Mile End
>>>>>> Road +
>>>>>> + Fax: +44-(0)20-8981-9465 London E1 4NS,
>>>>>> UK +
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7 Jun 2011, at 09:01, Alessandra Forti wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> are we going to discuss this later at the ops meeting? Are you
>>>>>>> using the Atlas Validation Kit [1] to take your measures? Most of
>>>>>>> my objections depend on the fact that I don't trust the software
>>>>>>> but if it was something recognised by WLCG and Hepix I might
>>>>>>> quiet down even if Manchester CPU hours get cut down by 28% with
>>>>>>> this change.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are other two points in the PMB minutes [2] that would be
>>>>>>> interesting to discuss.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) How likely it is that the cpu availability column will be
>>>>>>> dropped and when will we know it?
>>>>>>> 2) It seems a cap will be applied so that no site can get more
>>>>>>> than £200k but the final number hasn't been decided yet. I'm not
>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>> this but it'd be better to know it in advance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>>> alessandra
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://tinyurl.com/65r2k2g
>>>>>>> [2] http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/pmb/minutes/110531.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/06/2011 22:51, Steve Lloyd wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>> It looks like Apel hasn't updated yet for June. It seems to
>>>>>>>> be somewhat sluggish. It's fine for previous months so it will
>>>>>>>> probably be OK eventually. Anyway we're probably going to stop
>>>>>>>> using it and use the Production HS06 anyway.
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + Steve Lloyd Queen Mary, University
>>>>>>>> of London +
>>>>>>>> + E-mail:
>>>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>> School of Physics +
>>>>>>>> + Phone: +44-(0)20-7882-5057 Mile End
>>>>>>>> Road +
>>>>>>>> + Fax: +44-(0)20-8981-9465 London E1 4NS,
>>>>>>>> UK +
>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6 Jun 2011, at 15:07, Peter Grandi wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In the usual metrics prototype page:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://pprc.qmul.ac.uk/~lloyd/gridpp/metrics.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Durham does not get points for production because the HS6 factor
>>>>>>>>> for that is missing. Looking at the HS factor page:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://pprc.qmul.ac.uk/~lloyd/gridpp/hs06.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the BDII reported value is right, what is missing is the APEL
>>>>>>>>> reported value for HS06. But the APEL reported CPU time is
>>>>>>>>> there, so it is perplexing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Unless the APEL value that matters is that for analysis jobs
>>>>>>>>> even for production CPU scaling, which is missing because we
>>>>>>>>> don't do those (yet).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Where can I look or what can I do?
>>>>>>>>>
--
Dr John Bland [log in to unmask]
System Administrator office: 220
High Energy Physics Division tel (int): 42911
Oliver Lodge Laboratory tel (ext): +44 (0)151 794 2911
University of Liverpool http://www.liv.ac.uk/physics/hep/
"I canna change the laws of physics, Captain!"
|