Thanks for the reply, Bobby.

I’ve received notice that we can probably tolerate response times of up to 30 
seconds. Would this be more manageable? 5 seconds was an initial ask, but 20-30 
seconds is also a reasonable response time for our use case.

With the new SLA, do you think that we can easily perform this computation in 
spark?
--gautham

From: Bobby Evans [mailto:reva...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 7:06 AM
To: Steven Stetzler <steven.stetz...@gmail.com>
Cc: Gautham Acharya <gauth...@alleninstitute.org>; user@spark.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Beginner] Run compute on large matrices and return the result in 
seconds?

CAUTION: This email originated from outside the Allen Institute. Please do not 
click links or open attachments unless you've validated the sender and know the 
content is safe.
________________________________
Let's do a few quick rules of thumb to get an idea of what kind of processing 
power you will need in general to do what you want.

You need 3,000,000 ints by 50,000 rows.  Each int is 4 bytes so that ends up 
being about 560 GB that you need to fully process in 5 seconds.

If you are reading this from spinning disks (which average about 80 MB/s) you 
would need at least 1,450 disks to just read the data in 5 seconds (that number 
can vary a lot depending on the storage format and your compression ratio).
If you are reading the data over a network (let's say 10GigE even though in 
practice you cannot get that in the cloud easily) you would need about 90 NICs 
just to read the data in 5 seconds, again depending on the compression ration 
this may be lower.
If you assume you have a cluster where it all fits in main memory and have 
cached all of the data in memory (which in practice I have seen on most modern 
systems at somewhere between 12 and 16 GB/sec) you would need between 7 and 10 
machines just to read through the data once in 5 seconds.  Spark also stores 
cached data compressed so you might need less as well.

All the numbers fit with things that spark should be able to handle, but a 5 
second SLA is very tight for this amount of data.

Can you make this work with Spark?  probably. Does spark have something built 
in that will make this fast and simple for you?  I doubt it you have some very 
tight requirements and will likely have to write something custom to make it 
work the way you want.


On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 4:12 PM Steven Stetzler 
<steven.stetz...@gmail.com<mailto:steven.stetz...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Gautham,

I am a beginner spark user too and I may not have a complete understanding of 
your question, but I thought I would start a discussion anyway. Have you looked 
into using Spark's built in Correlation function? 
(https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/ml-statistics.html<https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fspark.apache.org%2Fdocs%2Flatest%2Fml-statistics.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7d44353d2dd5420bc35108d70abff11d%7C32669cd6737f4b398bddd6951120d3fc%7C0%7C1%7C636989691818858010&sdata=UG7owx%2FyHayKECNbDbfoNV53nJCSlF06Oak1plpi4RY%3D&reserved=0>)
 This might let you get what you want (per-row correlation against the same 
matrix) without having to deal with parallelizing the computation yourself. 
Also, I think the question of how quick you can get your results is largely a 
data access question vs how fast is Spark question. As long as you can exploit 
data parallelism (i.e. you can partition up your data), Spark will give you a 
speedup. You can imagine that if you had a large machine with many cores and 
~100 GB of RAM (e.g. a m5.12xlarge EC2 instance), you could fit your problem in 
main memory and perform your computation with thread based parallelism. This 
might get your result relatively quickly. For a dedicated application with well 
constrained memory and compute requirements, it might not be a bad option to do 
everything on one machine as well. Accessing an external database and 
distributing work over a large number of computers can add overhead that might 
be out of your control.

Thanks,
Steven

On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:24 AM Gautham Acharya 
<gauth...@alleninstitute.org<mailto:gauth...@alleninstitute.org>> wrote:
Ping? I would really appreciate advice on this! Thank you!

From: Gautham Acharya
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 4:22 PM
To: user@spark.apache.org<mailto:user@spark.apache.org>
Subject: [Beginner] Run compute on large matrices and return the result in 
seconds?


This is my first email to this mailing list, so I apologize if I made any 
errors.



My team's going to be building an application and I'm investigating some 
options for distributed compute systems. We want to be performing computes on 
large matrices.



The requirements are as follows:



1.     The matrices can be expected to be up to 50,000 columns x 3 million 
rows. The values are all integers (except for the row/column headers).

2.     The application needs to select a specific row, and calculate the 
correlation coefficient ( 
https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/reference/api/pandas.DataFrame.corr.html<https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpandas.pydata.org%2Fpandas-docs%2Fstable%2Freference%2Fapi%2Fpandas.DataFrame.corr.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7d44353d2dd5420bc35108d70abff11d%7C32669cd6737f4b398bddd6951120d3fc%7C0%7C1%7C636989691818868018&sdata=e5blX8ItE1JDJRx9D3FnmsXp4TnOKvyH6fA6%2Fw2QTbI%3D&reserved=0>
 ) against every other row. This means up to 3 million different calculations.

3.     A sorted list of the correlation coefficients and their corresponding 
row keys need to be returned in under 5 seconds.

4.     Users will eventually request random row/column subsets to run 
calculations on, so precomputing our coefficients is not an option. This needs 
to be done on request.



I've been looking at many compute solutions, but I'd consider Spark first due 
to the widespread use and community. I currently have my data loaded into 
Apache Hbase for a different scenario (random access of rows/columns). I’ve 
naively tired loading a dataframe from the CSV using a Spark instance hosted on 
AWS EMR, but getting the results for even a single correlation takes over 20 
seconds.



Thank you!


--gautham

Reply via email to