Cross-Border Resource Allocation use cases

NeIC Generic Area CoordinatorMichaela Barth <caela@kth.se>

2013-11-04Arlanda, Sweden

Obligations

• Identified need of Cross-border resource sharing, namely within the eNORIA report or the Nordic research programme

• NeIC got extra money from NordForsk to drive this question• In order to support the NCoEs (NeGI Centers of Excellence)

we will need some way to enable that the different user groups can combine their allocations in some way.

• NDGF Pilot project in 2010: problems with cost model, too much at once: also storage and individual access.

• Preliminary ideas for a new pilot project were discussed in the PF

2

Obligations

History

Cross Border Resource Sharing Pilot Project - New

• No shared pool of resources: Nordic HPC collaboration pilot project with a joint resource is currently undergoing an evaluation

• Nordic resource sharing in general should be restricted to support Nordic user communities, not individuals (this is also in concordance with the eNORIA report): Cross-border resource sharing would just be for Nordic user group projects, like e.g. NeGI. Only the collaborations NeIC is already supporting, where the National research councils have already assured the quality of the projects, would be allowed to apply for joint resources.

• HPC resources, not necessarily Grid computing.• Has to be based in the National Allocation Committees, the

National e-Infrastrucutre Providers and the National Research Councils

3

Continued

• We will have to address the needs of Nordic communities to provide and or give the perception of a single point of access across country borders. In this activity, one must be able to apply for resources, allocate resources, account resources, and do projects/user administration across borders (e.g.,

communicate project, user, quota, usage records between national initiatives).

4

Ideas

• User groups already applying for joint resources? • preallocation done already when Nordic user group projects

apply successfully for the Nordic research programme? NeIC doing the book keeping and negotiate the user capacity for NordForsk. (Needs agreement and pre-commitment from national allocation committees and the service providers).

• Credit based system where the user can apply for credits and would trade resources. Credits would need to be covered by national resources. What happens if countries run out of capacity?

• sync the National allocation committees first?• Let the users resell the resource allocations committed to

them: Resource allocation trading center (RATC)? If the users are allowed to resell and exchange granted resource allocations, they must be covered, if the user group is not able to resell their allocation, the users should still be able to actually use it.

5

Re-inventing money: the billing question!

• There are no cycles for free!• We need something that is more like a resource exchange

framework: conversion factors and/or real money equivalents (RMEs) more comparable to PRACE or EGI.

• juste retour principle: could create problems in our Nordic landscape

• No general structural design problem compared to real money: inflation of computer power available per cost unit should be high, interest should therefore be to spend allocations, not to save them. -> No need for artificial inflation or shrinking factor over time.

• Involvement of the user groups?: Why don't we give the resources into the hands of the research groups and let them decide? Giving RMEs to each of the groups, so the groups can decide where to buy the resources? 6

And even more to think about

• Who would reallocate the projects? when? JAC (Joint Allocation Committee)?

• Priorities in the machine re-assignment First comes, first served? Highest SE ranked? Biggest RME budget? taking care of special needs?

• RME: Supply and demand --> readjustment of RME values by JAC

• General project follow-up and accounting data evaluation? (compare how this done now within each country)

• when all is set-up and running: Produce reports/ views upon request for: Comparison of committed vs. used core hours for each

system or partner over time periods (i.e. 1,2,3 years). Comparison of initial commitments vs. actual

commitments for each system or partner over time periods (i.e. 1,2,3 years).

7

Legal issues

• Not touching this here.

8

What the user wants

• The Nordic research groups are our customers.• GOAL: A group of Nordic researches should be able to

combine their allocations in some way. If possible on one resource that fits their needs in the best way (research group must rank their preferred resources).

• Computational linguistics have a use case for trading resources.

• the granted NCoEs in the Health effort, and also within the Climate/Environment efforts.

• NCoEs start in 2014 and will go on for 5 years.

9