1 / 34

Evolving ATLAS Computing Model and Requirements

Evolving ATLAS Computing Model and Requirements. Michael Ernst, BNL With slides from Borut Kersevan and Karsten Koeneke U.S. ATLAS Distributed Facilities Meeting UCSC November 13, 2012. ATLAS Computing Mar-Aug 2012. Computing Resource Usage in 2012, 2013-2015. Current Resource Usage.

olisa
Download Presentation

Evolving ATLAS Computing Model and Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evolving ATLAS Computing Model and Requirements Michael Ernst, BNL With slides from BorutKersevan and KarstenKoeneke U.S. ATLAS Distributed Facilities Meeting UCSC November 13, 2012

  2. ATLAS Computing Mar-Aug 2012

  3. Computing Resource Usage in 2012, 2013-2015

  4. Current Resource Usage

  5. Resource Usage at Tier-2s

  6. Contributions by Country (Production and Analysis) Includes beyond pledge resources

  7. Contribution by Job Type Production Analysis US: 22% of available CPU used for Analysis 77% of Analysis done At Tier-2s T2 T1

  8. Contribution to Simulation (Aug-Oct) Avg # of fully Utilized cores (3843) (1867) (1762) (1067) (896)

  9. Contribution to Pile (Aug-Oct) Avg # of fully Utilized cores (1818) (1128) (526) (374)

  10. Contribution to Analysis (Aug-Oct) Avg # of fully Utilized cores (1024) (720) (590) (395) (342)

  11. Contribution to Reco (Aug-Oct) (512) Avg # of fully Utilized cores (1024) (720) (590) (395) (122) (112) (342) (108)

  12. Balancing Resources across the Tier-1 and Tier-2s for cost/benefit optimization E. Lancon (ICB Chair) at the Oct ICB Meeting

  13. Resource Development

  14. Evolution and Prediction of price/performance of CPU Servers B. Panzer/CERN In the US we have observed prices going up slightly between 2011 and 2012. Moore’s law hasn’t helped to improve price/performance ratio – Future? 16

  15. Multi-core vs. Many-core A typical modern compute server has 12-16 cores Number of cores in commodity machines grows arithmetically Number of cores in the enterprise space still grows geometrically Number of cores in our datacenters grows between the two, expected to slow down in the long run Many-core is not multi-core Observing memory hierarchy issues Cache coherency NUMA Memory b/w or I/O paths may be constraining Multiprocess is a convenient model, but it’s neither sustainable nor scalable

  16. Evolution and Prediction of Price for Disk Space B. Panzer/CERN Disk prices are ~1.5x compared to 2010 predictions 18

  17. Medium-term hardware trends Pricing follows market pressure, not technology I/O, disk and memory not progressing at the same rate as compute power Bulk of improvements in x86 still comes from Moore’s Law Enterprise and HPC-targeted developments, where cost-effective, trickle down to our datacenter environment Heterogeneous architectures Cross-platform, cross socket, hybrid CPUs, accelerators, throughput vs. classic computing

  18. Non-Intel Hardware GPUs NVIDIA working hard but process technology lacking P2P communication improved Software getting better MIC: Tesla might be no longer competitive ARM Slow penetration of the server space 64-bit instruction set defined (you can buy today 32 bit CPUs) Software improvements make ARM look like a viable option AMD Lagging behind, recent experiments not compelling FPGA Still too far off for mainstream accelerators, software issues Upcoming: low power/micro servers 192 cores, 1 GB/core $35k

  19. First Projections for 2015 - 2016

  20. Computing Requirements vs LHC Bunch Spacing

  21. Computing Requirements vs LHC Bunch Spacing S. McMahon

  22. Resource requests rising after LS1

  23. Computing Model Changes

  24. Analysis Offline Core Simulation

  25. Summary The Facilities have reliably delivered in all areas according to our obligations, and in may areas beyond The overall system, comprising facility hardware and services, and the ATLAS software needs to evolve to improve the efficiency and to cope with sharply growing requirements after LS1 Resources were used more effectively with “Life w/o “ESDs”, PD2P, reduced # of DS replicas but the potential for more –significant- is shrinking A combined effort, driven by analysis and software experts, is needed to get ATLAS Computing prepared for the challenges ahead Convinced the LHC machine will deliver … LS1 is around the corner but my impression from the last SW&C week is, there is not much activity in the SW area to address issues

More Related