-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 250
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
HRv4 hangs on orion and hercules #2486
Comments
This happens at high ATM resolution C1152. |
I made a HRv4 test run on orion as well. As reported previously, it hung at the beginning of the run. The log file is at /work2/noaa/stmp/rsun/ROTDIRS/HRv4 HOMEgfs=/work/noaa/global/rsun/git/global-workflow.hr.v4 (source) |
@RuiyuSun Denise reports that the privacy settings on your directories are preventing her from accessing them. Could you check on that and report back when it's fixed so others can look at your forecast? |
@DeniseWorthen I made the changes. Please try again. |
I've made a few test runs on my end and here are some observations:
Consistently all runs I have made, also the same as @RuiyuSun runs stall out here:
With high resolution runs (C768 & C1152) for various machines we've had to use different number of write grid tasks. I've tried a few and all are stalling though. This is using ESMF managed threading, so one thing to try might be moving away from that? To run a high res test case:
Change C1152 to C768 to run that resolution and also change your HPC_ACCOUNT, pslot, as desired. Lastly, if you want to turn off waves, you change that in C1152_S2SW.yaml. If you want to change resources, look in global-workflow/parm/config/gfs/config.ufs in the C768/C1152 section. If you want to run S2S only, change the app in global-workflow/ci/cases/hires/C1152_S2SW.yaml My latest run log files can be found at: |
@GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA suggested trying 2 write groups with 240 tasks in them. I meant to try that but tried 2 write groups with 360 tasks per group unintentionally, but I did turn on all PET files as @LarissaReames-NOAA thought that might have helpful info. The rundirectory is here: /work2/noaa/marine/jmeixner/wavesforhr5/test01/STMP/RUNDIRS/C1152t06/gfs.2019120300/gfsfcst.2019120300/fcst.272800 The log file is here: /work2/noaa/marine/jmeixner/wavesforhr5/test01/C1152t06/COMROOT/C1152t06/logs/2019120300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log The PET logs to me also point to write group issues. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Tagging @aerorahul for awareness. |
Thanks to everyone for the work on this. Has anyone tried this configuration with the write component off? That might help isolate where there problem is (hopefully) and then we can direct this accordingly for further debugging. |
I have not tried this without the write component. |
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA and others, I grabbed the run directory from the last experiment you ran (/work2/noaa/marine/jmeixner/wavesforhr5/test01/STMP/RUNDIRS/C1152t06/gfs.2019120300/gfsfcst.2019120300/fcst.272800), changed it to run just ATM component and converted it to run with traditional threading. It is currently running in /work2/noaa/stmp/djovic/stmp/fcst.272800, and it passed the initialization phase and finished writing 000 and 003 hour outputs successfully. I submitted the job with just 30 min wall-clock time limit, so it will fail soon. I suggest you try running full coupled version with traditional threading if it's easy to reconfigure it. |
some good news: |
my 48hr run finished |
@DusanJovic-NOAA I tried running without ESMF threading - but am struggling to get it set-up correctly and go through. @aerorahul is it expected that turning off esmf managed threading in the workflow should work? I'm also trying on hercules to replicated @jiandewang's success but with S2SW. |
I also lanched one S2SW but it's still in pending status |
WRTTASK_PER_GROUP_PER_THREAD_PER_TILE_GFS=10 with S2S did not work on orion: /work2/noaa/marine/jmeixner/wavesforhr5/test01/C1152t03/COMROOT/C1152t03/logs/2019120300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log |
mine is on hercules |
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA my gut feeling is the issue is related to the memory/node, hercules has more than orion. Maybe you can try 5 on orion |
Traditional threading is not yet supported in the global-workflow as an option. We have the toggle for it, but it requires a different set of ufs_configure files and I think we are waiting for that kind of work to be in the ufs-weather-model repo. @DusanJovic-NOAA |
I only changed ufs.configure:
And, I added job_card by copying one of the job_card from regression test run and changed:
80 is then number of cores on hercules compute nodes |
Ok. Yes. That makes sense for the atm-only. ATM_omp_num_threads: @[atm_omp_num_threads]
The original value for |
OMP_NUM_THREADS performance is i*nconsistent and generally poor if*
ATM_omp_num_threads: @[atm_omp_num_threads]
is not removed when esmf managed threading is set to false.
…On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 7:52 PM Rahul Mahajan ***@***.***> wrote:
I only changed ufs.configure:
1. remove all components except ATM
2. change globalResourceControl: from true to false
3. change ATM_petlist_bounds: to be 0 3023 - this numbers are lowe and
upper bounds of MPI ranks used by the ATM model, in this case 24_16_6 +
2_360, where 24 and 16 are layout values from input.nml and 2_360 are write
comp values from model_configure
And, I added job_card by copying one of the job_card from regression test
run and changed:
1. export OMP_NUM_THREADS=4 - where 4 is a number of OMP threads
2. srun --label -n 3024 --cpus-per-task=4 ./ufs_model.x - here 3024 is
a number of MPI ranks, 4 is a number of threads
3. #SBATCH --nodes=152
#SBATCH --ntasks-per-node=80
80 is then number of cores on hercules compute nodes 152 is the minimal
number of nodes such that 152*80 >= 3024
Ok. Yes. That makes sense for the atm-only.
Does your ufs.configure have a line for
ATM_omp_num_threads: @[atm_omp_num_threads]
@[atm_omp_num_threads] would have been 4. Did you remove it? Or does it
not matter since globalResourceControl is set to false?
The original value for ATM_petlist_bounds must have been 0 755 that you
changed to 0 3023, I am assuming.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FR2UXPLHUID674GWZLZ7UI7BAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRVGY2DCMBSGI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
I just fixed my comment about The original value for |
Yes ESMF managed threading requires several times more ranks and ESMF fails
when rank count goes above 21000 or so. This is a VERY serious issue
for resolution increases unless it is fixed.. reported in February.
…On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 7:56 PM Dusan Jovic ***@***.***> wrote:
I just fixed my comment about ATM_omp_num_threads:. I set it to 1 from 4,
I'm not sure if it's ignored when globalResourceControl is set to false
The original value for ATM_petlist_bounds was something like 12 thousand
or something like that, that included MPI ranks times 4 threads.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FW3WOMQFATDADHXU53Z7UJQJAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRVGY2TAMRYGE>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA BLUF, you/someone from the applications team could try traditional threading and we could gain some insight on performance at those resolutions. Thanks~ |
I have MANY test cases that use traditional threading and have converted
others from managed to traditional threading. It's generally
needed at high resolution to get decent run rates.
…On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 8:02 PM Rahul Mahajan ***@***.***> wrote:
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA <https://github.com/JessicaMeixner-NOAA>
I think the global-workflow is coded to use the correct ufs_configure
template and set the appropriate values for PETLIST_BOUNDS and
OMP_NUM_THREADS in the ufs_configure file.
The default in the global-workflow is to use ESMF_THREADING = YES. I am
pretty sure one could use traditional threading as well, but is an
unconfirmed fact as there was still work being done to confirm traditional
threading will work on WCOSS2 with the slignshot updates and whatnot.
Details on that are fuzzy to me at the moment.
BLUF, you/someone from the applications team could try traditional
threading and we could gain some insight on performance at those
resolutions. Thanks~
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FVGPKZCGQO7R37N6HLZ7UKE5AVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRVGY2TQMJYHA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
Ok. @GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA. Where do we employ traditional threading C768 and up? If so, we can set a flag in the global-workflow for those resolutions to use traditional threading. It should be easy enough to set that up. |
I don't know because I usually get CWD testcases from others and work from
there but yes that's an excellent idea. We probably though should
also use a multiple stanza MPI launcher for the different components to
minimize core wastage for components that don't thread, particularly WAVE
…On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 8:11 PM Rahul Mahajan ***@***.***> wrote:
Ok. @GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA <https://github.com/GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA>.
Where do we employ traditional threading C768 and up? If so, we can set a
flag in the global-workflow for those resolutions to use traditional
threading. It should be easy enough to set that up.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FQG5MHORVYQWBE3TY3Z7ULE7AVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRVGY3TANRTGY>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
Unfortunately I was unable to replicate @jiandewang hercules success for HR4 tag with the top of develop. Moreover, 10 write tasks per group was not a lucky number for orion either. |
Note this was with added waves - so this might have also failed for @jiandewang if he has used waves. |
summary for more tests I did on HERCULES: |
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA I agree the "hang" is almost certainly due to the point output search. For the point output search, it is the is_in_ungrid call you reference in your issue (https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/WW3/blob/7705171721e825d58e1e867e552e328fc812bfdd/model/src/w3triamd.F90#L1604) is the one which may need only to be called by the
EDIT---oops, just re-read your post. You don't think the hang is related to the the point search. Hmmm....I guess it depends on how long people have waited for before declaring the job "hung"? |
@DeniseWorthen - Let me rephrase a little. I agree that the hangs you are seeing are due to the wave initialization - which is in urgent need of a solution. However, we can get around the wave model initialization hang issue by reducing the number of points and ensuring the points we're looking for are from 0 to 360. If you do that, I still think we're going to get model hangs on orion/hercules (for example, we still have hangs on orion with S2S, we did find a combo that worked for S2S on hercules, but I think we'll still have that hang if we add waves back in but with a different point list like I had in my cases with different sets of points). That's why I want to make sure we update the ww3_shel.inp so that we are not having the known wave initialization issue cause problems. |
Also - udpate on my WCOSS2 runs. Reducing the total number of write grid components seems to have helped. I'll post more details on Monday. |
On WCOSS2 running with a different wave grid, I got a segfault (full log file is on dogwood /lfs/h2/emc/couple/noscrub/jessica.meixner/WaveUglo15km/Test03/COMROOT/Test03/logs/2020021300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log):
Rank 9280 is a write grid component task as For this run I had: Changing this to: The successful log file is here: /lfs/h2/emc/couple/noscrub/jessica.meixner/WaveUglo15km/Test04/COMROOT/Test04/logs/2020021300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log I suspect the issues we see on WCOSS2 are similar to what we've seen on hercules/orion but manifesting in segfaults versus hanging, but I could be wrong. |
We should be able to figure out analytically what resources the write grid
components require. I was talking to Jun about that. Model state is order
~120GB and UPP makes a second copy for.. reasons. THat gets us to 240GB
and UPP scratch spaces may eat up another 100GB or so spread through the
nodes used by the write grid component. WCOSS2 has 512GB so that should be
easily enough and I am puzzled it's not. One think that helps is to make
sure only one write grid component is on a node and to do that the ranks
per I/O group should be an integral multiple of ppn which is typically
128/4 for these runs. 120 and 60 don't meet this requirement. 128 and 64
(and 32) do.
On hercules/orion it should be 40/cpus-per-task, typically 20 or 10.
…On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:19 AM Jessica Meixner ***@***.***> wrote:
Also - udpate on my WCOSS2 runs. Reducing the total number of write grid
components seems to have helped. I'll post more details on Monday.
On WCOSS2 running with a different wave grid, I got a segfault (full log
file is on dogwood
/lfs/h2/emc/couple/noscrub/jessica.meixner/WaveUglo15km/Test03/COMROOT/Test03/logs/2020021300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log):
zeroing coupling accumulated fields at kdt= 12nid001107.dogwood.wcoss2.ncep.noaa.gov 0: PASS: fcstRUN phase 2, n_atmsteps = 11 time is 0.792372nid001652.dogwood.wcoss2.ncep.noaa.gov 9216: d3d_on= Fnid001652.dogwood.wcoss2.ncep.noaa.gov: rank 9280 died from signal 9nid001553.dogwood.wcoss2.ncep.noaa.gov 2056: forrtl: error (78): process killed (SIGTERM)
Rank 9280 is a write grid component task as
ATM_petlist_bounds: 0 10175
ATM_omp_num_threads: 4
layout = 24,16
For this run I had:
write_groups: 4
write_tasks_per_group: 60
Changing this to:
write_groups: 2
write_tasks_per_group: 120
The successful log file is here:
/lfs/h2/emc/couple/noscrub/jessica.meixner/WaveUglo15km/Test04/COMROOT/Test04/logs/2020021300/gfs_fcst_seg0.log
I suspect the issues we see on WCOSS2 are similar to what we've seen on
hercules/orion but manifesting in segfaults versus hanging, but I could be
wrong.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FX2L53JUS2W6H2DR5T2BHZNHAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIOBTGE3TKNBXGY>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
In the job cards I got from Rahul's sandboxes, the nodes are specified as either
for C768 and
for C1152. I'm not familiar w/ this notation. What does 82-82 mean? |
This looks like a gaea6 job card. Maybe useful on gaea5 or maybe now slurm
supports this everywhere and I just didn't know it
…On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 5:35 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
In the job cards I got from Rahul's sandboxes, the nodes are specified as
either
#SBATCH --nodes=63-63
for C768 and
#SBATCH --nodes=82-82
for C1152.
I'm not familiar w/ this notation. What does 82-82 mean?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FUBXA4PRAUKIE35B6L2BJTRDAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIOBUGI3TINZVGA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
@GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA Since you seem to know, what does specifying the nodes like this mean? |
I have no idea.
…On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 6:29 PM Denise Worthen ***@***.***> wrote:
@GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA <https://github.com/GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA>
Since you seem to know, what does specifying the nodes like this mean?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FQNGG4AMPMVJSDZY4T2BJZ4XAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIOBUGM4DCMRRGA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
Hi @DeniseWorthen. Here's the relevant snippet from the slurm documentation on sbatch:
So, I'm pretty sure it's just specifying the minimum and maximum number of nodes the job can run with. In this case they are the same. |
@JacobCarley-NOAA Thanks. That makes sense. |
I copied Rahul's C768 run directory (also created my own fix subdir) and compiled both top-develop and the HR4 tag in debug mode using
When I try
Run directory (hercules): |
For hercules my current snapshot is on/work2/noaa/noaatest/gwv/herc/hr4j/the rundir is ./dc the source dir is ./sorc and |
I checked again that my configuration was a copy of Rahul's c768 run directory. I used the compile in debug mode and it fails immediately w/ the error I posted above. That run directory is /work2/noaa/stmp/dworthen/c768s2sw I then used Dusan's instructions posted earlier for using traditional threading. He did it by removing all other components except ATM, so I made a similar adjustment w/ all components included. Using the same executable, it ran for 25 minutes of calendar time. That run directory is /work2/noaa/stmp/dworthen/c768s2sw.2. I used here I haven't yet tried the 2nd case w/ a non-debug compile. I did confirm that the first case hangs w/ a release compile. Also, I made the WW3 points list only 240 long in both cases. (See ww3_shel.nml, which is being used in my tests since it is easy then to point to a different point list.) |
Okay on Hercules On Orion 24x24 ATM decomposition 2 groups of 240 I/O tasks 240 OCN 120 ICE 998 WAVE tasks. 2 threads per task. 16 tasks per node |
The hangs I reported earlier seem to happen at higher decompositions and resource usages. Running that down. |
The problem what we can't quickly find WHERE in the various component(s) we are getting stuck remains an issue. |
Based on my testing, the issue seems to be fundamentally one w/ using ESMF managed threading. I've been doing all my testing in /work2/noaa/stmp/dworthen/hangtests, with sub-dirs there for ESMF-managed threading (ESMFT) and traditional threading (TRADT). I can run the test case w/ traditional threading w/ the G-W executable (from Rahu's sandbox), with my own compile and with my own debug compile. I cannot run with ESMF managed threading either w/ the G-W executable, my own compile or my own debug compile. I've tried w/ and w/o waves. In all cases, I either get a hang or, with debug, I get the error I posted about regarding floating point exception. @JacobCarley-NOAA I think at this point it is not a WAV issue, assuming you reduce the points list to something small. I think others are better suited to debugging it. That will allow me to return my focus to the grid-imprint issue (#2466), which I know is also very high priority. |
I wonder if there was a build option missed that is causing managed threading to not work correctly? |
What I mean is with the ESMF library built in those stacks. |
@JacobCarley-NOAA - as a near-term work around I plan to request a feature in the global-workflow to add traditional threading to enable orion/hercules in the near term, unless you'd prefer a different path forward? |
I get it at high rank counts (8000 or so) without managed threading on
orion.
…On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 6:44 PM Brian Curtis ***@***.***> wrote:
I wonder if there was a build option missed that is causing managed
threading to not work correctly?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FWZ5AD4TRRHV5NFW3L2B53PDAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIOJUGUYTOOJRGI>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
@DeniseWorthen Thanks so much for your efforts. Please proceed to return to the grid imprint issue (#2466). @JessicaMeixner-NOAA I think the ability to run with traditional threading (no managed threading) was added to GW earlier this year (see GW Issue 2277). However, I'm not sure if it's working. If it's not, I'd recommend proceeding with opening a new issue for this feature. Since something might already exist, hopefully it's not too much of a lift to get it going. This will hopefully get you working in the short-ish term. Now, there's still something going on that we need understand. @GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA Would you be able to continue digging into this issue? |
@JacobCarley-NOAA a comment from @aerorahul earlier in this thread:
I'll open a g-w issue (update: g-w issue: NOAA-EMC/global-workflow#3122) |
I intend to but if I encounter hangs I need people who know the component
codes to figure out where and why the hangs
are occurring. Debugging is very slow on Orion where I have encountered a
hang with 7008 mpi ranks, 1400 wave ranks and 24x32 atm decomposition
WITHOUT esmf managed threading. It looks like an issue with large numbers
of ranks which we get first with ESMF managed threading but eventually at
higher resolution, without this setting too. This is DIFFERENT from the
ESMF bug where we still can't spawn more than 21K ranks without a segfault
in the ESMF code somewhere.
…On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 8:10 PM JacobCarley-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
@DeniseWorthen <https://github.com/DeniseWorthen> Thanks so much for your
efforts. Please proceed to return to the grid imprint issue (#2466
<#2466>).
@JessicaMeixner-NOAA <https://github.com/JessicaMeixner-NOAA> I *think*
the ability to run with traditional threading (no managed threading) was
added to GW earlier this year (see GW Issue 2277
<NOAA-EMC/global-workflow#2277>). However, I'm
not sure if it's working. If it's not, I'd recommend proceeding with
opening a new issue for this feature. Since something might already exist,
hopefully it's not too much of a lift to get it going. This will hopefully
get you working in the short-ish term.
Now, there's still something going on that we need understand.
@GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA <https://github.com/GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA>
Would you be able to continue digging into this issue?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FTJAR5H5W2G2BW2YPT2B6FUFAVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIOJUG4YTKMBWGE>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
Thanks @GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA! Just send me a quick note offline (email is fine) when you need a component expert to jump in and I'll be happy to coordinate accordingly. |
It looks like the hangs are related to the total number of WAVE tasks but are also related to total resource usage. I have verified that a 16x16 decomposition (ATM) with traditional threads (two per rank) and 1400 wave ranks does not hang on either Orion or Hercules but a 24x32 decomposition with 1400 wave ranks does. 998 rank runs do get through with a 24x32 decomposition. So it looks like total job resources is a contributing issue. It isn't just a hard barrier that we can't run 1400 wave tasks on orion or hercules. |
@RuiyuSun |
I have gotten ESMF managed threading cases to work with low resource usage
on both Hercules and Orion.. this since ESMF managed threading remains
easier to support in the workflow. With higher resource usage I am
seeing hangs either upon initiation of the wave model or somewhere vaguely
in ESMF not involving the wave model. I will capture these cases and
report. We can run retrospectives with traditional threading but not with
esmf managed threading. The latter is too slow but I am still looking for
special cases where it might be fast enough. Turnaround on both Hercules
and Orion is very slow but C1152 coupled is also a large resource intensive
system and the R&D machines, are not really large enough to support these
retrospectives anyway. WCOSS2 and Gaea C5 and C6 are large enough.
…On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 2:50 PM Rahul Mahajan ***@***.***> wrote:
@RuiyuSun <https://github.com/RuiyuSun>
I have implemented a traditional threading option in the global-workflow
with suggestions from @junwang-noaa <https://github.com/junwang-noaa> and
@DusanJovic-NOAA <https://github.com/DusanJovic-NOAA>. global-workflow PR
3149 <NOAA-EMC/global-workflow#3149> is under
review.
I have tested the case of C768 S2SW on Hercules. Please see the details
and changes in the open PR.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2486 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDS4FU2HWSFU6IOJNBVFKT2FBGJ3AVCNFSM6AAAAABQ3GJUOKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKMZWGIYDSOJZGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
George W Vandenberghe
*Lynker Technologies at * NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2141
College Park, MD 20740
***@***.***
301-683-3769(work) 3017751547(cell)
|
George V. noticed that The HRv4 does not work on Hercules or Orion. It hangs sometime after WW3 starts. No relevant message in the log files about the hanging.
To Reproduce: Run an HRv4 experiment on Hercules or Orion
Additional context
Output
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: