Teradata Co-existing Systems Parallel Efficiency -- Calculation & Reconfiguration

1. Co-existing Systems Parallel Efficiency
Calculation & Reconfiguration
Shaheryar Iqbal
Best viewed in Microsoft PowerPoint

2. Acknowledgements
• Acknowledgements to Mr. Larry Higa for using his work Procedures.
1 November 2012

3. Co-existing Systems Intro
• Relative performance comparison factor denoting how much more
powerful a node model is relative to another node model.
1 November 2012

4. Available CPU
CPU available =
CPU Capacity – CPU Max used
1 November 2012

5. Vproc Space Allocation
Check Vproc Space
allocations for data skew
LOCKING DBC.DISKSPACE FOR ACCESS
SELECT
vproc (Format 'zzzz9') (TITLE 'AMP //Number')
, SUM(currentperm) /(1024**3) (Format 'zzz,zzz,zz9.999') (TITLE 'CurrPerm//GBytes')
FROM DBC.Diskspace
GROUP BY 1
ORDER BY 2 ;
1 November 2012

6. Relative Performance Ratios of Different
Models
Relative Node Power Comparisons
Model Type 5250 5300 5350 5380 5400
Base Model = 5250 1.00 0.93 1.22 1.63 1.95
Base Model = 5300 1.08 1.00 1.31 1.75 2.11
Base Model = 5350 0.82 0.76 1.00 1.34 1.61
Base Model = 5380 0.61 0.57 0.75 1.00 1.2
Base Model = 5400 0.51 0.47 0.62 0.83 1.00
Teradata Relative
Model Power
comparisons figures
1 November 2012

7. Co-existing Systems Parallel Efficiency
Calculation and Reconfiguration Steps
• Step 1: Derivation Relative Node Power From Customer ResUsage Data
• Step 2: Map configuration to a base model type.
• Step 3: Determine bottlenecking model type.
• Step 4: Calculate unusable CPU capacity for non-bottlenecking model types.
• Step 5: Calculate usable CPU capacity for non-bottlenecking model types.
• Step 6: Apply usable CPU capacity to the number of nodes in the
configuration.
• Step 7: Calculate current configuration efficiency.
• Step 8: Reconfiguring System and Calculating Gain in Reconfiguration.
1 November 2012

8. • First Case Study
1 November 2012

9. System Basic Info
1 November 2012

10. Step 1: Derivation Relative Node Power From Customer
ResUsage Data
-- CPU Busy calculation from ResUsage SQL
SELECT
/* Node ID */
NodeId (FORMAT '999-99', TITLE '//Node//ID')
/* PERCENT OF TIME THE CPUS WERE BUSY DOING WORK */
,AVG( ( (CPUUServ + CPUUExec ) / NULLIFZERO(NCPUs) ) / secs ) (Format 'ZZ9', NAMED
AvgCpubusy, TITLE 'Node//CPU//bsy')
FROM DBC.RESUSAGESPMA
WHERE THEDATE >= (date - 61 )
Group BY NodeID
ORDER BY NodeId ;
> 1 November 2012

11. Step 1: Derivation Relative Node Power From Customer
ResUsage Data (Contd..)
Skewed Node
due to Non
Teradata work
The ResUsage CPU utilization by model type for the configuration are ;
66.25% for the 5400 with 9 AMPs per node,
63.85% for the 5450 with 10 AMPs per node,
74.40% for the 5500 with 14 AMPs per node.
CPU Utilization Per
Model
> 1 November 2012

12. Step 1: Derivation Relative Node Power From Customer
ResUsage Data (Contd..)
Taking the inverseperconvert work is theper unit of work to by the number of AMPs per node:
The relative time to unit of from time utilization divided work per unit of time:
5400 – 1 / 7.25 = 0.14 relative work / 9 = 7.25 relative time per unit of work,
5400 – 66.25% with 9 AMPs; 66.25 per unit of time,
5450 – 63.85% with 10 AMPs;
5450 – 1 / 6.38 = 0.16 relative work per unit 6.38 relative time per unit of work,
63.85 / 10 = of time,
5500 – 74.40% with 14 AMPs;
5500 – 1 / 5.31 = 0.19 relative work per unit 5.31 relative time per unit of work.
74.40 / 14 = of time.
66.25
/9
1/
7.25
> 1 November 2012

13. Step 2: Map configuration to a base model type
The 5450 node can process as much data as a 5400 node can in 1.14 as much time
The 5500 node can process as much data as a 5450 node can in 1.36 as much time
The 5450 node can process as much data as a 5400 node can in 0.88 of the time
The 5500 node can process as much data as a 5400 node can in 1.20 of the time
The 5400 node can process as much data as a 5500 node can in 0.73 of the time
The 5450 node can process as much data as a 5400 node can in 0.83 of the time
Model
/ Base
> 1 November 2012

14. Step 3: Determine bottlenecking model type
9 * 1.00 Number of AMPs *
= 9.00 Relative Node Power
The bottlenecking model is the base model where
all equivalent AMPs are greater than or equal to
the actual number of AMPs in the configuration.
> 1 November 2012

15. Step 4: Calculate unusable CPU capacity for non-bottlenecking
model types
Bottle Neck
Model AMPs *
Relative Node
Power
( 10.38 – 9 ) ( 11.78 – 10 ) ( 14.00 – 14 )
/ 10.38 / 11.78 / 14.00
> 1 November 2012

16. Step 5: Calculate usable CPU capacity for non-bottlenecking
model types
100 – 13.28 100 – 15.10 100 – 0 =
= 86.72 = 84.90 100
> 1 November 2012

17. Step 6: Apply usable CPU capacity to the number of nodes in
the configuration
Number of
Nodes * Rel
Model Power
Equivalent
Nodes *
Usable capacity
> 1 November 2012

18. Step 7: Calculate current configuration efficiency
Usable
Capacity / Total
Eq nodes
> 1 November 2012

19. Step 8: Reconfiguring System and Calculating Gain in
Reconfiguration
Reconfiguring
5400 as bottle
neck model with
11 AMPs
Adjusting 5450
AMPs count to 13
All the calculations
are same as in
step 1 -7
Parallel Efficiency
after reconfiguration
> 1 November 2012

20. • Second Case Study
How calculations made,
The 2nd case study
can be viewed by double
has Excel Sheet
clicking on slides
pages embedded
> 1 November 2012

21. Step 1: Derivation Relative Node Power From Customer
ResUsage Data
Avg CPU Utilization Per Model
Model 4980 Model 5400 Model 5450
75.61 69.03 65.63
75.51 68.04 73.13
75.71 69.94 73.25
75.50 70.44 71.33
71.40
67.16
67.21
67.06
75.58 69.36 69.52
> 1 November 2012

22. Step 2: Map configuration to a base model type
Avg CPU Utilization Per Model
Model 4980 Model 5400 Model 5450
75.61 69.03 65.63
75.51 68.04 73.13
Double click to view how 75.71 69.94 73.25
calculations are made 75.50 70.44 71.33
71.40
67.16
67.21
67.06
75.58 69.36 69.52
Number of AMPs per
12 14 16
Node
Model 4980 5400 5450
Empirical ResUsage
Avg Node CPU % Busy 75.58 69.36 69.52
data
AvgCPU % Busy per
6.30 4.95 4.34 Time per unit of Work
AMP
Inverse of CPU % Busy
0.16 0.20 0.23 Work per Unit of Time
per AMP
Relative Node Power Based on Customer Workload
Model 4980 5400 5450
Base = 4980 1.00 1.27 1.45 Model/ Base
Base = 5400 0.79 1.00 1.14
Base = 5450 0.69 0.88 1.00
> 1 November 2012

23. Step 3: Determine bottlenecking model type
Relative Node Power Based on Customer Workload
Model 4980 5400 5450
Base = 4980 1.00 1.27 1.45 Model/ Base
Base = 5400 0.79 1.00 1.14
Base = 5450 0.69 0.88 1.00
Identifying Bottle Neck Model
4980 5400 5450
Number of AMPs per
Node 12.00 14.00 16.00
12 * Relative Node
power 12.00 15.26 17.40 BottleNeck Model
14 * Relative Node power 11.01 14.00 15.96
16 * Relative Node power 11.04 14.03 16.00
Double click to view how
calculations are made
> 1 November 2012

24. Step 4 - Step 7: Calculating current configuration efficiency
Recalculation of usable Capacity and configuration Efficiency
Number of AMPs per
12 14 16
Node
Model 4980 5400 5450
Empirical ResUsage
Avg Node CPU % Busy 75.58 69.36 69.52
data
Derived relative Node
Base = 4980 1.00 1.27 1.45
Power
Equivalent Number of
Base = 4980 12.00 15.26 17.40
AMPs for 4980
Unusable Capacity by
0.00 8.23 8.02
Model type in %
Usable Capacity by
100.00 91.77 91.98
Model type
Equivalent Number of
2.76 3.51 8.00 14.27
5450 nodes
Usable Capacity * 5450
2.76 3.22 7.36 13.34
Equivalent Nodes
Configuration Efficiency 93.48
Double click to view how
calculations are made
> 1 November 2012

25. Step 8: Reconfiguring System and Calculating Gain in
Reconfiguration
Number of Nodes 4 4 8
Reconfiguring for 5380 as Bottleneck Model
Model 4980 5400 5450
Original Number of
12 14 16
AMPs per Node
Reconfigured Number
11 14 16
of AMPs Per Node
Base = 5450 0.69 0.88 1.00
Equivalent 5450 AMPs 11.04 14.03 16.00 5450 as Bottleneck
if negative capacity
Unusable capacity in % 0.34 0.23 0.00 that will be shifted to
bottleneck model
Double click usable capacity in % 99.66 99.77 100.00
to view how
calculations
Model 4980 5400 5450 Total number of Nodes
are made
Number of Nodes 4 4 8
Equivalent Number of
2.76 3.51 8.00 14.27
5450 nodes
Usable Capacity * 5450
2.75 3.50 8.00 14.25
Equivalent Nodes
Configuration Efficiency 99.88
> 1 November 2012

26. Questions
The only bad question
is the question
never asked
> 1 November 2012