Mixed requires a bit of work but I think is worth it.
Find requires no effort so I see no reason to drop it.
Perhaps one reason not to include it is that it might take an intractable amount of time.
George, have you tried the find part yet? Just how bad is it?
However, this is exactly the point. It's a hard workload and it will make most
systems look bad. If it is optional, then they won't do it because they don't want
to look bad.
We had agreement on find, the community asked for it, we gave it to them. It makes our
steering committee look bad if we change now. I suggest we leave find and figure out how
to add mixed. If we still have our own discussion about this, we should move it to the
full mailing list I think.
Thx
John
On Jun 24, 2017, at 1:05 AM, Julian Kunkel
<juliankunkel(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
Dear John,
would move find and (any) concurrent benchmark or other application
specific mode to the extended benchmark.
Makes it easier to rollout the initial version.
Cheers,
Julian
2017-06-24 2:05 GMT+02:00 John Bent <John.Bent(a)seagategov.com>:
>
>> On Jun 23, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Andreas Dilger <adilger(a)dilger.ca> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 23, 2017, at 4:57 PM, John Bent <John.Bent(a)seagategov.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> We had a great session at ISC (about 30 people I think) and made great
progress in the weeks leading up to it as well. Thanks to Satoshi we even got the two
attached slides added into the official slides being released from the Top 500 session!
We had 6 people sign up at the BOF saying that they’ll run the benchmark when it is
finalized.
>>>
>>> I know I always say that we have ‘almost’ finalized the benchmark. But we
really are getting much closer; it helped so much that Nathan combined the benchmarks and
George worked on the script.
>>>
>>> I think we only have two open questions right now:
>>>
>>> 1. do 47K random IO in the IOR-hard or do 47K simple strided? My original
thinking was strided but someone pointed out that the idea is to create the bounding box
and random is harder than strided. Also random might be increasingly prevalent these days
with more analytics and machine learning and graph analytics, etc. So I propose that we
do random unless there are objections here.
>>
>> May as well go random at that point.
>>
>>> 2. Should we do some sort of mixed IO workload in addition to running the 4
tests serially? I like the idea but am not sure how exactly to do it. Do we need to
merely mix IOR-hard and IOR-easy or md-hard and md-easy or both or mix all 4 at once? Do
we just launch multiple command lines in the background and hope that the mpirun launch
times are fast enough that they overlap? Do we need to modify IOR/mdtest to split the
ranks in half and do different workloads with the two halves? Thoughts?
>>
>> This would be a bit of a dog's breakfast, and very hard to specify the test
parameters. Do all of the loads need to be running for the whole duration? How does this
work if some jobs finish early? What if, for example, there was a workload scheduler in
the storage that (automatically?) segregated the IO of each workload and they actually ran
serially and didn't contend at all? Would that be considered an improvement, since
this could help real-world jobs as well?
>>
> Agree about the scheduler. But what about a modified IOR that split the ranks in two
and half did easy and the other half did hard?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
>> Maybe something for V2?
>>
>>> We also made some procedural decisions. The initial steering committee will
be Jay Lofstead, Julian Kunkle, and myself. That steering committee membership will last
until IO500 is up and running and stable at which point the community can nominate new
members. All decisions will be discussed first on the mailing list and we will try for as
much consensus as possible. The VI4IO organization will host the IO500.
>>>
>>> Thanks very much,
>>>
>>> John
>>> <io500_two_slides.pdf>_______________________________________________
>>> IO-500 mailing list
>>> IO-500(a)vi4io.org
>>>
https://www.vi4io.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/io-500
>>
>>
>> Cheers, Andreas
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IO-500 mailing list
> IO-500(a)vi4io.org
>
https://www.vi4io.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/io-500
--
http://wr.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/people/julian_kunkel