Experiences with Large Data Sets

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Buffers & Spoolers J L Martin Think about it… All I/O is relatively slow. For most of us, input by typing is painfully slow. From the CPUs point.
Advertisements

13 May, 2005GlueX Collaboration Meeting1 Experiences with Large Data Sets Curtis A. Meyer.
Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment V.Kolosov, I.Korolko, S.Makarychev ITEP Moscow.
The Mass Storage System at JLAB - Today and Tomorrow Andy Kowalski.
Online Data Challenges David Lawrence, JLab Feb. 20, /20/14Online Data Challenges.
1 Data Management D0 Monte Carlo needs The NIKHEF D0 farm The data we produce The SAM data base The network Conclusions Kors Bos, NIKHEF, Amsterdam Fermilab,
Remote Production and Regional Analysis Centers Iain Bertram 24 May 2002 Draft 1 Lancaster University.
Design & Management of the JLAB Farms Ian Bird, Jefferson Lab May 24, 2001 FNAL LCCWS.
CDF data production models 1 Data production models for the CDF experiment S. Hou for the CDF data production team.
1 The Terabyte Analysis Machine Jim Annis, Gabriele Garzoglio, Jun 2001 Introduction The Cluster Environment The Distance Machine Framework Scales The.
Farm Management D. Andreotti 1), A. Crescente 2), A. Dorigo 2), F. Galeazzi 2), M. Marzolla 3), M. Morandin 2), F.
Jean-Yves Nief CC-IN2P3, Lyon HEPiX-HEPNT, Fermilab October 22nd – 25th, 2002.
HEPiX Karlsruhe May 9-13, 2005 Operated by the Southeastern Universities Research Association for the U.S. Department of Energy Thomas Jefferson National.
Introduction to U.S. ATLAS Facilities Rich Baker Brookhaven National Lab.
David N. Brown Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Representing the BaBar Collaboration The BaBar Mini  BaBar  BaBar’s Data Formats  Design of the Mini 
Inside your computer. Hardware Review Motherboard Processor / CPU Bus Bios chip Memory Hard drive Video Card Sound Card Monitor/printer Ports.
6/26/01High Throughput Linux Clustering at Fermilab--S. Timm 1 High Throughput Linux Clustering at Fermilab Steven C. Timm--Fermilab.
9 February 2000CHEP2000 Paper 3681 CDF Data Handling: Resource Management and Tests E.Buckley-Geer, S.Lammel, F.Ratnikov, T.Watts Hardware and Resources.
JLAB Computing Facilities Development Ian Bird Jefferson Lab 2 November 2001.
Performance measurement with ZeroMQ and FairMQ
Fast Crash Recovery in RAMCloud. Motivation The role of DRAM has been increasing – Facebook used 150TB of DRAM For 200TB of disk storage However, there.
CPSC 404, Laks V.S. Lakshmanan1 External Sorting Chapter 13: Ramakrishnan & Gherke and Chapter 2.3: Garcia-Molina et al.
DMBS Internals I. What Should a DBMS Do? Store large amounts of data Process queries efficiently Allow multiple users to access the database concurrently.
Components of a Computer System
Monte Carlo Data Production and Analysis at Bologna LHCb Bologna.
The KLOE computing environment Nuclear Science Symposium Portland, Oregon, USA 20 October 2003 M. Moulson – INFN/Frascati for the KLOE Collaboration.
1 Cluster Development at Fermilab Don Holmgren All-Hands Meeting Jefferson Lab June 1-2, 2005.
Active Storage Processing in Parallel File Systems Jarek Nieplocha Evan Felix Juan Piernas-Canovas SDM CENTER.
Sep. 17, 2002BESIII Review Meeting BESIII DAQ System BESIII Review Meeting IHEP · Beijing · China Sep , 2002.
HIGUCHI Takeo Department of Physics, Faulty of Science, University of Tokyo Representing dBASF Development Team BELLE/CHEP20001 Distributed BELLE Analysis.
UTA MC Production Farm & Grid Computing Activities Jae Yu UT Arlington DØRACE Workshop Feb. 12, 2002 UTA DØMC Farm MCFARM Job control and packaging software.
An Efficient Threading Model to Boost Server Performance Anupam Chanda.
2.1.4 Data Representation Units.
Computing Issues for the ATLAS SWT2. What is SWT2? SWT2 is the U.S. ATLAS Southwestern Tier 2 Consortium UTA is lead institution, along with University.
DMBS Internals I. What Should a DBMS Do? Store large amounts of data Process queries efficiently Allow multiple users to access the database concurrently.
Batch Software at JLAB Ian Bird Jefferson Lab CHEP February, 2000.
D0 Farms 1 D0 Run II Farms M. Diesburg, B.Alcorn, J.Bakken, R. Brock,T.Dawson, D.Fagan, J.Fromm, K.Genser, L.Giacchetti, D.Holmgren, T.Jones, T.Levshina,
CODA Graham Heyes Computer Center Director Data Acquisition Support group leader.
Computer Performance. Hard Drive - HDD Stores your files, programs, and information. If it gets full, you can’t save any more. Measured in bytes (KB,
AMS02 Data Volume, Staging and Archiving Issues AMS Computing Meeting CERN April 8, 2002 Alexei Klimentov.
Hans Wenzel CDF CAF meeting October 18 th -19 th CMS Computing at FNAL Hans Wenzel Fermilab  Introduction  CMS: What's on the floor, How we got.
Jianming Qian, UM/DØ Software & Computing Where we are now Where we want to go Overview Director’s Review, June 5, 2002.
Apr. 25, 2002Why DØRAC? DØRAC FTFM, Jae Yu 1 What do we want DØ Regional Analysis Centers (DØRAC) do? Why do we need a DØRAC? What do we want a DØRAC do?
The ALICE Data-Acquisition Read-out Receiver Card C. Soós et al. (for the ALICE collaboration) LECC September 2004, Boston.
© OCR 2016 Unit 2.6 Data Representation Lesson 1 ‒ Numbers.
Compute and Storage For the Farm at Jlab
Getting the Most out of Scientific Computing Resources
STORAGE DEVICES Towards the end of this unit you will be able to identify the type of storage devices and their storage capacity.
M. Bellato INFN Padova and U. Marconi INFN Bologna
NFV Compute Acceleration APIs and Evaluation
Getting the Most out of Scientific Computing Resources
WP18, High-speed data recording Krzysztof Wrona, European XFEL
Memory COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE
Computational Requirements
Lecture 16: Data Storage Wednesday, November 6, 2006.
Bernd Panzer-Steindel, CERN/IT
SAM at CCIN2P3 configuration issues
STORAGE DEVICES Towards the end of this unit you will be able to identify the type of storage devices and their storage capacity.
Lecture 11: DMBS Internals
Introduction and History
Data Representation Numbers
STORAGE DEVICES Towards the end of this unit you will be able to identify the type of storage devices and their storage capacity.
Lecture 14 Virtual Memory and the Alpha Memory Hierarchy
Example of DAQ Trigger issues for the SoLID experiment
Introduction and History
Lecture Topics: 11/1 General Operating System Concepts Processes
Introduction and History
Peta-Cache: Electronics Discussion I Gunther Haller
Introduction and History
Virtual Memory 1 1.
Presentation transcript:

Experiences with Large Data Sets Curtis A. Meyer 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Data Handling Baryon PWA analysis using the CLAS g11a data set.  p ! p + -  p ! p  ! p + - (o)missing  p ! p  ! p + - (o)missing  p ! p ’ ! p + - ()missing  p ! K+  ! p - K+ Consistent Analysis using same tools and procedures. N* ! p , p , p’ , K , p  ,   D* ! p ,   1 +- events 15,000,000  events 1,400,000  events 1,000,000 K 300,000 ’ events 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting CMU Computers fermion gold Dual 3.0GHz Xeon 800 MHz FSB 1GB RAM 80GB /scratch 1024 kb Cache fermion Dual 2.4GHz Xeon 400 MHz FSB 1GB RAM 60GB /scratch 512 kb Cache Gigabit RAID Storage ~6 Tbytes File Servers 15 nodes 15 nodes Batch System: pbs Scheduler: Underlord Dual Xeon 2.4, 2.8, 3.1 GHz System shared with Lattice QCD ~$85,000 Investment for a 66 CPU system 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Networks Tape silo Cache Disk 155 Mbit Jefferson Lab PSC ES net CMU 2Gbit Wean MEG 1Gbit 100Mbit RAID Transfer Tools: srmget JLab developed stages data at JLab and then moves it to remote location. bbftp LHC tool similar to ftp, copies files Can sustain 70-80 Mbits/second of data transfer We peaked at about 600GB in one 24 hour period. Tape to Cache is bottle neck 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Data Sets The DST data sets existed on the tape silos at JLab 2positive 1negative track filter: 10,000 ~1.2 Gbyte files flux files (normalization) 10,000 ~ 70 Kbyte files trip files (bad run periods) 10,000 ~ 20 Kbyte files 30,000 files with about 12 Terabytes of data Number of files is big (have trouble doing ls). Relevant Data spread over multiple files creates a book keeping nightmare. 1.2Gbyte file size is not great 12-20 Gbytes would be more optimal 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Some Solutions The CLAS data model is effectively non-existent. Data is repeated multiple times in the stream (up to 6 times) Not all the allocated memory is used. It is extremely difficult to extract relevant event quantities. Little or no compression is implemented. Assumption for our analysis: We do not need access to the raw data for physics. Goal: Reduce 10TB of data to fit on 1 800GB disk. Make access to data transparent to the user. 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Data I/O Data i/o is a bottle neck, you want to be able To only load the data that you need into Memory. Make decision on event type, Conf. Level, …. Example: Tree structure with linked lists and branches Event Event bytes Header information Raw Data kbytes DST Data Physics Data 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Data Compression Data should be compressed as much as possible. Integer words should be byte packed. Some Floats can be truncated and byte-packed Do not duplicate data. Data should be accessed through function calls, rather than direct access. Hide the data from the end user Classes provides a very nice mechanism to do this. The compression scheme can change as long as the data are tagged with a version. Eliminates user mistakes in extracting data. DON’T ADD OVERHEAD TO THE DATA STREAM. MAKE IT AS LEAN AS POSSIBLE. Put intelligence in access tools 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Results We have been able to reduced the data set from 12 TBytes to 600 GBytes With no loss of physics information. Each of the 10,000 files is now about 60MB in size. Better compression occurred with the Monte Carlo. 1.7GB compressed to 8 Mbytes. We have not looked at the CLAS raw data sets. While I expect some compression Possible, it is probably less than what has been achieved here. 2 Gbytes 2 Gbytes 100’s Mb 5 Gbytes per “tape” RDT DST Mini-Dst 2 Gbytes 60 Mbytes 5 Mbs 2.065 Gbytes per “tape” Exported to outside users 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

Monte Carlo Production 3.2 GHz Xeon Processor 32-bit kernel RHE3 100,000 events (4-vector input) 4MB keep Convert to Geant input 30MB flush Run Geant 170MB flush Smear output data 170MB flush Reconstruct data 1700MB flush Compress output file 8MB keep 3-4 hours of CPU time 0.1 to 0.15 second/event Typical CLAS Acceptance is about 10% 60,000,000 Raw  ‘ 130,000,000 Raw  600,000,000 Raw  More intelligence in generation needed 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Baryon Issues t s u  p ! p +- All known to be important in Baryon photoproduction  p + - To coherently add the amplitudes, the protons need to be in the same reference frame for each diagram + +  p + - Write all amplitudes as Lorentz scalars “covariant tensor formalism” Chung, Bugg, Klempt, … +  p + - 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting Amplitude Tool Created a tool that very efficiently evaluates amplitudes given four vectors as input. Up to spin 9/2 in the s-channel Up to L=5 Correctly adds all s,t and u diagrams Input based on Feynman Diagrams, has been tested against know results and identities. To evaluate 100,000 events with spin 7/2 takes a couple of hours. This is VERY FAST. Production Amplitudes are written as electric and magnetic mulitopoles. 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting

GlueX Collaboration Meeting PWA Issues Events “mass” Data 20,000 Data 50,000 Accp. M.C. 100,000 Raw M.C. Events “mass” Raw MC Events “mass” Accp. MC 13 May, 2005 GlueX Collaboration Meeting