[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Any input for some talk about usage of Debian in HPC



On 19/05/2024 12:12, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi,

I have an invitation to have some talk with the title

    Debian GNU/Linux for Scientific Research

Abstract:

    Over the past decade, Enterprise Linux has dominated large-scale
    research computing infrastructure. However, recent developments have
    sparked increased interest in community-led alternatives. Debian
    GNU/Linux, a long-standing choice among researchers for supporting
    scientific work, is experiencing a renewed interest for High-Throughput
    Computing (HTC) and High-Performance Computing (HPC) applications.  This
    presentation will provide an overview of how Debian is being utilized to
    support scientific research and will include a case study showcasing the
    migration of HTC operations from Enterprise Linux 7 (EL7) to Debian.

While I could talk about Debian Science and Debian Med in general it
would be cool to reference to some real life examples where Debian is
used in Science and what might be the reason to use Debian.

Hi, Andreas.

The Sanger Centre in the UK use Ubuntu + OpenStack + Ceph:

https://www.sanger.ac.uk/group/core-software-services/

I realise that it's not Debian, but it is based on Debian. I went there many years ago when they were running Debian on DEC Alpha AXP's, but they moved to CentOS because many other Academic HPC centres were using it, including ours when I worked at the University of Aberdeen.

This was not a good experience, and they decided to change to Ubuntu mainly because of the support provided by Canonical for OpenStack and Ceph. However, in my opinion, CentOS/RHEL is not a good platform for bioinformatics because the 'Enterprise' approach stifles innovation.

You can't ignore the host OS when you talk about HPC applications and the HEP (High Energy Physics) community put a lot of effort into developing good node provisioning systems and job-scheduling for HPC. Consequently, there was a significant bias towards support for HEP applications running under CentOS and less support for bioinformatics.

This was partly the motivation underlying our development of Bio-Linux in order to provide biologists with an alternative platform running on their own hardware instead of struggling to get the IT department to port the software they wanted to use to CentOS. In that respect the Debian-Med project was fundamentally important in helping biologists do their work outside of the centrally managed 'Enterprise' oriented IT policy imposed on us by Universities and Research Institutes.

The Sanger Centre provide a centrally managed HPC that is 'biologist-friendly' and, I think, is an excellent model of how it should be done. However, it does not support the view that Debian should be the HPC OS because the main reason they chose Ubuntu was the commercial support for OpenStack and Ceph provided by Canonical.

I personally would like to stress the "we package what we use" aspect
and the "we mentor upstream to merge competence of the program with
packaging skills" idea.  Any input would be welcome to cover more ideas.

As you might remember, I built and I advocate the use of 'departmental' or 'research-group' clusters. These are much more powerful than an individual biologists personal laptop, but are under the administrative control of the department or research group that funded their purchase.

In the past, I've used various HPC node-provisioning, cluster filesystem and job submission systems running under one version of another of Bio-Linux, now using your "med-bio" meta-package to provide bioinformatics software instead of the discontinued Bio-Linux packages.

However, I've recently set up a 3-node 'Proxmox-VE' cluster:

https://www.proxmox.com/en/proxmox-virtual-environment/overview

[Proxmox is a GPL server management system based on Debian]

I'm using the Proxmox cluster for a bioinformatics in schools project with the University of Edinburgh:

https://4273pi.org/

I'm also planning to use it for a new project with the IAEA in Vienna.

I think that giving biologists the choice of running the software they want under the OS they choose is very important when innovation is the priority of an organisation rather than centralisation of IT systems to reduce cost. You can, of course use Proxmox-VE as the node-provisioning and shared filesystem of an HPC cluster. Or, simply provide biologists with VMs running their OS of choice, administered by themselves e.g. a Bio-Linux VM or vanilla Debian etc. etc.

Finally, don't forget about Amdahl's Law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

There is really no such thing as an HPC or HTP 'application', because it's the underlying resource management system of an HPC cluster that provides the 'HP'. In my experience, most bioinformatics applications are 'embarrassingly' parallel and in this case processes do not communicate with each other. The 'HP' is achieved by managing the workflow efficiently using e.g. "Slurm" or "[Sun]Grid-Engine".

MPI-parallel processes are subject to diminishing returns as the number of processes increases as described by Amdahl's Law. Other 'Map-Reduce' workflows are also 'embarrassingly' parallel and GPGPU workflows while parallel on a given device are not HPC in the conventional sense despite nVidia's claims to the contrary, but are GPGPU-accelerated applications that are, typically, executed as embarrassingly parallel work-flows across clusters of servers with GPGPUs. All 'SLI' does is to combine GPGPUs locally on a server which, again, is not conventional HPC.

All of these technologies have fantastic potential, but I've been very frustrated and disappointed many times how difficult it is to utilise GPGPU for bioinformatics. It's only recently that e.g. Oxford Nanopore Technology and Pacbio have made effective use of GPGPU for base-calling long reads. The basic problem is that existing 'classic' bioinformatics analyses require re-writing to execute in parallel and it is only a few new bioinformatics algorithms that are worthwhile designing for GPGPU.

Bye,

  Tony.

--
Minke Informatics Limited, Registered in Scotland - Company No. SC419028
Registered Office: 3 Donview, Bridge of Alford, AB33 8QJ, Scotland (UK)
tel. +44(0)19755 63548                    http://minke-informatics.co.uk
mob. +44(0)7985 078324        mailto:tony.travis@minke-informatics.co.uk


Reply to: