Thanks, this and Jacek's CPU for queries analysis are exactly what we need
to kick-start the discussions at the TechAssessWG on Monday.

> From: Chris Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: LSST Data Management <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:49:33 -0400
> To: LSST Data Management <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [LSST-data] Archive/Data Access Center computing and networking
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> From my notes at the meeting, updated to be consistent with Don's
> minutes (pertinent section below), I had
> 
> BASELINE
> - have 90TFlops at archive center
>  - maintenance: 10 TFlops
>  - real time processing: 25 TFlops (only 8-12 hrs)
>  - planned reprocessing: 25 TFlop  (grows over time)
>  - query: 5-10 TFlops
>  - deep detection: 5 TFlops
> leaves
>  - 25 TFlops on demand reprocessing
> 
> But of course many of these (planned reprocessing in particular) are
> functions of TIME.  So I've tried to capture some of this in a
> spreadsheet (attached).
> 
> Here's the description:
> 
> - First of all, the average observing night (including some twilight)
> at Pachon is about 10hrs.  Since the 25TFlops at the base facility is
> sized to process data in real time, that's actually a need of only
> 10.4 TFlops spread over 24 hours.
> 
> - I've changed the "maintenance" to a *fraction* of the total CPU
> instead of a fixed 10 TFlops.  Is this correct?
> 
> - The deep detection is assumed not to scale with time.  While it is
> true that just the *detection* will be on stacked (i.e., single)
> images, the process of *stacking* images WILL scale over time,
> because we have more images to stack.  I haven't taken this into
> account.
> 
> - REPROCESSING: As we discussed, the reprocessing will scale with
> time.  I've postulated TWO components to this:
>  - an "initial reprocessing" load, which simply acknowledges that
> as we start the survey we'll want to rerun the pipeline MANY times to
> work out bugs and reprocess after bug fixes.
>  - a "routine reprocessing" which starts in year two and simply
> scales linearly as the data volume grows to meet the requirement that
> in any given year, we reprocess ALL previous data
> 
> - QUERY LOAD:
>  - I've assumed some simple arbitrary functional load, with an up-
> front peak as both the project and the users check out the system
>  - Jacek mentioned he was going to take a crack at this.  I'd
> encourage guessing at a *functional* form of the demand.  Perhaps
> this function could be informed by the query load as a function of
> time seen by SDSS?
> 
> - ON-DEMAND REPROCESSING
>  - with no reduced images online, we've got to reprocess to serve
> users reduced images.  While the catalog will be the "gold mine" for
> science, there will a significant user community who want or need the
> *images*.  I've broken the load into three categories
>    - user verification: hopefully users, and/or LSST staff, will do
> spot checks on the reductions EVEN IF they are using catalogs.  This
> will be something that peaks sometime early in the survey and then
> tails off as we all learn to trust the LSST pipeline and resulting
> catalog products
>    - reduced images: this is simply the load for reproducing
> specific reduced images.  I've made this a ramp up as the survey
> starts, plateauing at something less than the "on demand" we agreed
> upon in the telecon.
>    - transients: some fraction of the transients will require
> detailed investigation of what was there beforehand, investigation at
> a level that the information in catalogs won't be sufficient (obvious
> example: we detect a hostless transient... there's nothing at that
> spot before, even in the stacked images.  But forced photometry at
> that point could turn up a series of 2 sigma events which weren't
> detected previously).  I've postulated that this is also a function
> of time, since some users will want to run the query "Give me the
> forced photometry at exactly this spot for data going back N years".
> If the user interested in the transient at this point waits until
> next year, then this forced photometry may be done in the routine
> reprocessing, but astronomers working on transients are often not
> that patient.  ;-)
> 
> I've stopped at this point to open the floor for discussion.  I think
> it would be useful to come up with and agree upon some reasonable
> functional forms for the query load and on-demand load, even if they
> are way oversimplified, so we have some idea of how the CPU load
> might track over time.
> 
> As you can see, with the basic assumptions I've made here, the
> 90TFlops at the Archive center is sufficient only out to around year 5.
> 
> And you'll also note I've run "DM operations" out to beyond the 10yr
> lifetime of the survey.  If I were a reviewer, I'd nail LSST if they
> didn't at least mention this, since the scientific results we're
> claiming LSST will produce will not emerge until at least 1-2 years
> after we have the *complete* data set!  Perhaps we don't have to
> "budget" for it, but I think acknowledging it will be a good idea.
> 
> Cheers,
>  Chris
> 
> 
> On Jul 19, 2006, at 5:44 PM, Don Dossa wrote:
> 
>> From the tech assess concal -7-17-2006
>> 
>> The discussion centered around two main topics: Archive computing
>> needs and network bandwidth between the archive site (AC) and data
>> access center (DAC).
>> 
>> We assume the astronomical image pipelines are not drastically
>> changing but the query load imposed on the archive and data center
>> sites can be variable and require additional computations, disk IO,
>> and network bandwidth.
>> 
>> Given as base computing requirement of 25 TF, then we assume an
>> archive compute requirement of 90 TF of which about 80 TF should be
>> available. This is allocated as 25 TF to reprocess the nightly raw
>> images which are delivered over 24 hours.  An allocation of 25 TF
>> is for on-demand reprocessing but some of this load could be
>> shifted to the researcher's home institution.  Another 5 TF is
>> needed for deep detection processing,  and 5-10 TF to handle
>> queries. The remaining 25+ TF is used to reprocess years of data.
>> This personally seems low since that implies 3-4 nights of images
>> are done per day.  Other than the processing of each night¹s
>> images, we expect the compute requirements to constantly increase
>> over time.
> 
> ========================================================================
> =
> Dr. R. Chris Smith                    EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> National Optical Astronomy Observatory
> Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory
> 950 N. Cherry Ave.                    Casilla 603
> Tucson, AZ 85719                      La Serena, CHILE
> Office: 520-318-8555                  FAX: 520-318-8170
> WWW: http://www.ctio.noao.edu/~chris
> ========================================================================
> =
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LSST-data mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.lsstmail.org/mailman/listinfo/lsst-data
> 


_______________________________________________
LSST-data mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lsstmail.org/mailman/listinfo/lsst-data

Reply via email to