Hi Johann,
can you use the current master branch of the app? We have it working
for Ceph and DAOS.
Best,
Julian
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 2:41 PM Lombardi, Johann via IO-500
<io-500@vi4io.org> wrote:
>
> Andreas (and the rest of IO-500 committee),
>
>
>
> Thanks for the clarifications. If we had been aware of this new C-app, we would have been *delighted* to help the committee to test it and debug it in our environment several months ago. Unfortunately, this wasn’t announced to this mailing list and we clearly missed it.
>
>
>
> The current situation is that the C-app is clearly broken for submissions that don’t use the default POSIX backend and we have been spending a huge amount of time debugging it under a very tight deadline (on our side, we will only get one window to run the benchmarks on a production cluster on Monday). At this point, there is a high risk that we won’t be able to fix the C-app on time and will thus not be able to submit any *new* results. I understand that we are not the only one in this situation and it would be a pity to have fewer submissions this time because of the new requirement. I would advocate for more flexibility and maybe relax the rule to something like “if the C-app does not work in your environment, please report the bug and give us a link to the ticket”. We are happy to continue the debugging activity and make sure the C-app works well for SC’20. Everyone will be warned at that time and won’t have any excuse. That being said, for ISC’20, I think that more pro-active communications on this mailing list several months in advance would have been welcomed.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Johann
>
>
>
> From: IO-500 <io-500-bounces@vi4io.org> on behalf of Andreas Dilger via IO-500 <io-500@vi4io.org>
> Reply-To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
> Date: Thursday 28 May 2020 at 23:10
> To: "Chaarawi, Mohamad" <mohamad.chaarawi@intel.com>
> Cc: "io-500@vi4io.org" <io-500@vi4io.org>
> Subject: Re: [IO-500] Some rules clarifications?
>
>
>
> On May 28, 2020, at 11:44 AM, Chaarawi, Mohamad via IO-500 <io-500@vi4io.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi John (and rest of IO-500 committee),
>
>
>
> On a different note, could you please shed some light on the committee’s decision to require 2 “apps” to run the benchmark and not just one?
>
>
>
> It seems this change has been announced very close to the deadline and the C-app appears to be broken currently for non-POSIX backends (mainly ones that require extra options that are not IOR generic). Maybe I missed an earlier notification, and excuse me if I did. But if not, I just feel that a requirement like that should be made right after the conference for the next submission deadline, and not so close to the deadline where people may have already have results to submit using the io-500-dev repo and not the new io500-app one.
>
>
>
> Mohamad,
>
> the motivation for running two copies of the benchmark and not only one is that
>
> we want to move forward with using the io500 C-app vs the bash script because:
>
> - the existing io500.sh script had caused problems for some sites, because
>
> it is "launching" the various ior/mdtest runs itself via mpirun, rather
>
> than being the executable itself
>
> - parsing results from the mdtest/ior output to generate the scores was itself
>
> fragile, and prone to error if the output was slightly different
>
>
>
> Running the C-app and bash script overlapping for ISC'20 allows us to compare
>
> the results across multiple different systems, to ensure that the two produce
>
> equivalent results, and to ensure that the C-app is working correctly across
>
> different environments. Having the bash script results available in case
>
> of issues or discrepancies between the two is important to ensure continuity.
>
>
>
> The C-app has been in development for some time, but has not had much feedback.
>
> Making it part of the ISC'20 submission for everyone ensures there is enough
>
> testing before we do a complete changeover to the C-app for SC'20.
>
>
>
> Cheers, Andreas(*)
>
>
>
> * These statements merely reflect my own personal view; the only mechanism for
>
> announcing official IO500 policies and decisions is the committee@io500.org
>
> email address
>
>
>
>
>
> From: IO-500 <io-500-bounces@vi4io.org> on behalf of John Bent via IO-500 <io-500@vi4io.org>
>
> Reply-To: John Bent <johnbent@gmail.com>
>
> Date: Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:25 PM
>
> To: Mark Nelson <mnelson@redhat.com>
>
> Cc: "io-500@vi4io.org" <io-500@vi4io.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [IO-500] Some rules clarifications?
>
>
>
> Mark and all,
>
>
>
> The committee just added a rule clarifying precreation of directories to the rules page: https://www.vi4io.org/io500/rules/submission. The newly added rule states:
>
>
>
> "Each of the four main phases (IOR easy and hard, and mdtest easy and hard) has a subdirectory which can be precreated and tuned (e.g. using tools such as lfs_setstripe or beegfs_ctl); however, additional subdirectories within these subdirectories cannot be precreated."
>
>
>
> Below my signature, I am including my standard disclaimer that my email is not necessarily an official IO500 position but note that the rules page itself is. :)
>
>
>
> Hope this is clear; please do reply with any questions or need for further clarification,
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> John(*)
>
> * These statements merely reflect my own personal view; the only mechanism for announcing official IO500 policies and decisions is the committee@io500.orgemail address.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 5:14 PM John Bent <johnbent@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Mark,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the interest. It will be great to get your contributions!
>
>
>
> 1. Must be exactly 300 seconds.
>
> 2. Does not include the directories. Other historical submissions have tuned the directories exactly as you describe.
>
> 3. Yes, 10+ metal nodes in AWS satisfies this requirement.
>
>
>
> Other committee members, and community members, please chime in if I got anything wrong! Mark, you might note the disclaimer below my signature which is just our committee's way of being careful. I'll make sure to discuss this email with the rest of the committee and will let you know if any of my answers need official clarification.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> John(*)
>
>
>
> * These statements merely reflect my own personal view; the only mechanism for announcing official IO500 policies and decisions is the committee@io500.orgemail address.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 4:44 PM Mark Nelson via IO-500 <io-500@vi4io.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
>
>
>
>
> We are thinking about throwing together some cephfs io500 results for
>
> ISC20 and I just wanted to make sure that we are doing the right thing
>
> in a couple of cases. Any help would be much appreciated since we've
>
> never submitted results before. We might have a couple of additional
>
> questions later on, but for now:
>
>
>
>
>
> 1) "All create/write phases must run for at least 300 seconds; the
>
> stonewall flag must be set to 300 which should ensure this."
>
>
>
> Is it acceptable to set the stonewall higher than 300, or is a setting
>
> of exactly 300 required?
>
>
>
>
>
> 2) "The file names for the mdtest output files may not be pre-created."
>
>
>
> Does this also include the directories? We have the ability to pin
>
> directories to specific MDSes that helps in the easy tests. We also have
>
> an experimental feature that more or less does this psuedo-randomly
>
> behind the scenes so long as a top level xattr is set, but it would be
>
> convenient if we could just pre-create the mdtest directories and set
>
> the xattr to pin them individually in the "directory setup" phase of the
>
> test if allowed. Likewise, we have code that allows users to provide a
>
> hint if a specific directory is expected to have lots of files which can
>
> improve performance in the hard tests. I would like to pre-create the
>
> mdtest directory so that we can set the xattr informing ceph that we
>
> expect a lot of files to be written in that directory.
>
>
>
>
>
> 3) "Only submissions using at least 10 physical client nodes are
>
> eligible to win IO500 awards and at least one benchmark process must run
>
> on each."
>
>
>
> We are planning on running on AWS. So long as we are using 10+ metal
>
> nodes does that meet the requirement to have "at least 10 physical
>
> client nodes"?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> IO-500 mailing list
>
> IO-500@vi4io.org
>
> https://www.vi4io.org/mailman/listinfo/io-500
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> IO-500 mailing list
>
> IO-500@vi4io.org
>
> https://www.vi4io.org/mailman/listinfo/io-500
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers, Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Corporation SAS (French simplified joint stock company)
> Registered headquarters: "Les Montalets"- 2, rue de Paris,
> 92196 Meudon Cedex, France
> Registration Number: 302 456 199 R.C.S. NANTERRE
> Capital: 4,572,000 Euros
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>
> _______________________________________________
> IO-500 mailing list
> IO-500@vi4io.org
> https://www.vi4io.org/mailman/listinfo/io-500
--
Dr. Julian Kunkel
Lecturer, Department of Computer Science
+44 (0) 118 378 8218
http://www.cs.reading.ac.uk/
https://hps.vi4io.org/
PGP Fingerprint: 1468 1A86 A908 D77E B40F 45D6 2B15 73A5 9D39 A28E
_______________________________________________
IO-500 mailing list
IO-500@vi4io.org
https://www.vi4io.org/mailman/listinfo/io-500