From: Arlindo da S. <arl...@na...> - 2011-10-09 22:41:56
|
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Huddleston, John < Hud...@ci...> wrote: > Jennifer**** > > ** ** > > While creating the AMSR CTL file I did some testing on the Ubuntu Linux > build of GrADS and found that version 2.0.0 was faster than both 2.0a8 and > 2.0a9 by some 20-30%.**** > > ** ** > > So, I did the same run on Windows and it was horribly slow. I re-compiled > GrADS with the GNU profiler and found that the HDF5 HAPatom_object was the > culprit.**** > > ** ** > > % cumulative self self total**** > > time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name**** > > 99.21 85.51 85.51 HAPatom_object**** > > 0.15 85.64 0.13 475492 0.00 0.00 gahrow**** > > 0.07 85.70 0.06 475544 0.00 0.00 gree**** > > 0.06 85.75 0.05 HTPinquire**** > > 0.05 85.79 0.04 76373 0.00 0.00 gxfill**** > > 0.03 85.82 0.03 475559 0.00 0.00 galloc**** > > 0.03 85.85 0.03 DFKconvert**** > > ** ** > > I checked and I was using HDF5-1.8.6; so, I’m building HDF5-1.8.7 for > Cygwin and will rebuild GrADS 2.0.0.**** > > ** > Please let me know that you find. I have tried my windows build of 2.0.a9 on this large netcdf-4 file (with compression) ftp://gma...@ft.../fp/das/Y2011/M10/D01/DAS.ops.asm.inst3_3d_asm_Np.GEOS572.20111001_0000.V01.nc4 and found that lats4d -i DAS.ops.asm.inst3_3d_asm_Np.GEOS572.20111001_0000.V01.nc4 -format stats ran slightly faster on Windows 7 than Mac OS X 10.6 (48.6s vs 51.6s) on the same hardware (different boots). This was based on HDF5 1.8.4 and NetCDF 4.1.1 that I used for the 2.0.a9 builds. I will now build 2.0.0 with new libraries and rerun the benchmark. Arlindo > ** > > John**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* Jennifer Adams [mailto:jm...@co...] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 05, 2011 3:39 PM > *To:* Arlindo da Silva > *Cc:* Brian Doty; Huddleston, John > *Subject:* Re: 4.1.1 vs. 4.1.2**** > > ** ** > > I think netcdf-4.1.2 (with zlib-1.2.5 and hdf5-1.8.7) is what we should use > for GrADS 2.0.0. We've been using 4.1.2 at COLA for just about a year. I > have made new builds for darwin and CentOS and posted them to our FTP > server, and I changed my supplibs.html page too. Arlindo, thanks for > bringing this bug to my attention. John, I guess you have no extra work > since your builds are already linked with 4.1.2. **** > > --Jennifer**** > > ** ** > > p.s. Here is what Dennis Heimbigner wrote about the performance bug: **** > > "The performance bug has been in the code since almost**** > > the beginning of opendap support. It is possible > (even probable) that you will not encounter it. > It occurs when you read a large variable and specify > it as a constraint in the url. E.g. http://x.com/y.nc?var[0:1] > The bug is that the code ignores the [0:1] and reads > the whole variable. The result is correct, but unnecessary > data is read." **** > > ** ** > > I don't exactly know whether that syntax he shows is different from the > requests in the gds log that look like this:**** > > "...GET /gfs.dods?ps.ps[0][0:360][0:719] ..."**** > > Maybe they ARE different and that's why we don't encounter a performance > change between old versions and the new snapshot. In any event, I think > 4.1.2 is the way to go for now. **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Oct 5, 2011, at 1:20 PM, Arlindo da Silva wrote:**** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Jennifer Adams <jm...@co...> wrote: > **** > > Hi, Arlindo -- **** > > The release notes for 4.1.2 ( > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/release-notes-4.1.2.html ) > mention a lot of items that are relevant for GrADS, one especially that was > pointed out by me (speedup in opening of large files). I will definitely not > be going to back to 4.1.1. We've been using 4.1.2 at COLA for a long time. > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > This is good to know. If you have been using 4.1.2 for sometime than this > is proof of stability. I'll follow your lead.**** > > **** > > Here are the 7 tests I ran with the two builds -- I could not detect any > difference in the time it took for these tasks to run when comparing 4.1.2 > and 4.2.snapshot.**** > > ** ** > > I share your concern about 4.2. First, it is very new, and second, a large > portion of the opendap codebase was apparently rewritten. Let me know when > you make the final decision about 4.1.2 and I'll update my supplibs > accordingly.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers!**** > > ** ** > > Arlindo**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > **** > > **** > > --Jennifer**** > > ** ** > > 'reinit'**** > > '!date'**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * The original bug**** > > 'sdfopen > http://opendap.gsfc.nasa.gov:9090/dods/GEOS-5/fp/0.25_deg/assim/inst1_2d_hwl_Nx' > **** > > 'set x 1 1152'**** > > 'd slp'**** > > say result**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * NOMADS GDS**** > > 'sdfopen http://nomads.ncep.noaa.gov:9090/dods/gfs/gfs20111003/gfs_00z'** > ** > > 'set x 1 360'**** > > 'set y 1 181'**** > > 'set z 1 26'**** > > 'set t 1 65'**** > > 'define foo = hgtprs'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * COLA GDS, Ensembles**** > > 'sdfopen http://monsoondata.org:9090/dods/gfsens/gfsens.2011100400'**** > > 'set x 1 360'**** > > 'set y 1 181'**** > > 'set z 1 7'**** > > 'set e 1 22'**** > > 'define foo = z'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * Netcdf4 high res data behind GDS**** > > 'sdfopen http://monsoondata.org:9090/dods/nicam/sst'**** > > 'set x 1 5120'**** > > 'set y 1 2556'**** > > 'd ave(sst,t=1,t=8)'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * Netcdf4 high res data on local disk**** > > 'open /data/hdf5/grids/sst.ctl'**** > > 'set x 1 5120'**** > > 'set y 1 2556'**** > > 'd ave(sst,t=1,t=8)'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (0)**** > > * Local file, PDEF'd**** > > 'open /data/netcdf/gswp/Albedo_mean_csu.ctl'**** > > 'set x 1 360'**** > > 'set y 1 150'**** > > 'set z 1'**** > > 'set t 1 12'**** > > 'define foo = albedo'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > if (1)**** > > * Classic netcdf**** > > 'sdfopen /data/netcdf/rean/air.mon.mean.nc'**** > > 'set x 1 144'**** > > 'set y 1 73'**** > > 'set z 1 17'**** > > 'set t 1 349'**** > > 'define foo = air'**** > > endif**** > > ** ** > > '!date'**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Oct 5, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Arlindo da Silva wrote:**** > > > > **** > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Jennifer Adams <jm...@co...> wrote:* > *** > > Hi, Dennis -- **** > > Using the same GrADS source code, I have created two builds, one linked > with netcdf-4.1.2 and the other netcdf-4.2-snapshot2011100320. Both use > hdf5-1.8.7. The bug that showed up with 4.1.3 does not reproduce with either > build. Furthermore, I am unable to detect any performance difference with > these two builds, having tested some bulky I/O requests via OPeNDAP from > several different GDS servers, and also from local classic netcdf files and > very large compressed netcdf4 files. I am inclined to use 4.1.2 for my GrADS > release. Can you give me an example for how to test the performance > enhancements in the 4.2 snapshot? **** > > ** ** > > I have a similar experience. Comparing builds with older 4.1.1 and most > recent 4.2 snapshot (with subsetting) gives essentially the same timing (if > anything, 4.1.1 is a tiny bit faster: 49.69 vs 45.63, but this difference > could be "natural variability"). **** > > ** ** > > Jennifer: BTW, here is my grads benchmark:**** > > ** ** > > lats4d -i > http://opendap.gsfc.nasa.gov:9090/dods/GEOS-5/fp/0.25_deg/assim/inst1_2d_hwl_Nx-format stats -lat 0 30 -ntimes 10 > **** > > ** ** > > Since 4.1.1 has been working for us very reliably for over a year, I am > very tempted to stick with it in name of stability. Are there any major bug > fixes going from 4.1.1 to 4.1.2?**** > > ** ** > > Arlindo**** > > ** ** > > **** > > ** ** > > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > --**** > > Jennifer M. Adams**** > > IGES/COLA**** > > 4041 Powder Mill Road, Suite 302**** > > Calverton, MD 20705**** > > jm...@co...**** > > ** ** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > --**** > > Jennifer M. Adams**** > > IGES/COLA**** > > 4041 Powder Mill Road, Suite 302**** > > Calverton, MD 20705**** > > jm...@co...**** > > ** ** > > > > **** > > ** ** > |