Workshop March 2022 Examples #139

PaulTalbot-INL · 2022-03-10T17:36:33Z

Pull Request Description

What issue does this change request address?

Initial steps towards #122

What are the significant changes in functionality due to this change request?

Adds example case(s) for users to try out while learning the code

"simple" case (1 source, 1 sink, 1 fixer source)

Other modifications:

Adds nominal parallel controls from HERON input
- not HPC, just local parallel
Modifies default Optimizer inputs to more generically useful values
- shrinkFactor 2 -> 1.5
- initialStepSize default -> 0.2
- gradient convergence target 1e-8 -> 1e-4
Bugfix for running Debug in Opt mode

For Change Control Board: Change Request Review

The following review must be completed by an authorized member of the Change Control Board.

1. Review all computer code.
2. If any changes occur to the input syntax, there must be an accompanying change to the user manual and xsd schema. If the input syntax change deprecates existing input files, a conversion script needs to be added (see Conversion Scripts).
3. Make sure the Python code and commenting standards are respected (camelBack, etc.) - See on the wiki for details.
4. Automated Tests should pass.
5. If significant functionality is added, there must be tests added to check this. Tests should cover all possible options. Multiple short tests are preferred over one large tes.
6. If the change modifies or adds a requirement or a requirement based test case, the Change Control Board's Chair or designee also needs to approve the change. The requirements and the requirements test shall be in sync.
7. The merge request must reference an issue. If the issue is closed, the issue close checklist shall be done.
8. If an analytic test is changed/added, the the analytic documentation must be updated/added.
9. If any test used as a basis for documentation examples have been changed, the associated documentation must be reviewed and assured the text matches the example.

dgarrett622

I pulled your branch locally and tried to run the test to make sure it runs on a Windows machine. It failed for two reasons:

GLPK can only be run serially, there is no "threads" option.
Specifying 10 for is too many cores for my machine (max 8).

Commenting out the "threads" option and specifying 6 for <parallel> allowed the test to run successfully for my setup. I think the fixes for these two issues are pretty simple to implement and will ensure that the test runs on Windows.

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:17:37Z

src/dispatch/pyomo_dispatch.py

@@ -303,7 +303,8 @@ def dispatch_window(self, time, time_offset,
      attempts += 1
      print(f'DEBUGG solve attempt {attempts} ...:')
      # solve
-      soln = pyo.SolverFactory(self._solver).solve(m)
+      solve_options = {'threads': 2}


Setting "threads" does not work for GLPK. The options passed into "solve" appear to be specific to the solver used. I'm sure this is an option for CBC, but it throws an error when using GLPK. I don't know what the behavior is if other solvers are used.

Interesting; I don't recall adding this line; I must have been experimenting with something I didn't finalize. I can remove this. Philosophically I think it should only be set based on user requests specific to individual solvers.

I think perhaps there are pieces of your top comment above that aren't showing. I think you have to escape XML nodes as <example> (using backticks "`") otherwise they get treated as formatting tags such as "" (no backticks).

Yeah, forgot the backticks on that one. Preview function is your friend.

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:24:54Z

templates/template_driver.py

+      # for now, outer does not use InternalParallel
+      batchSize = run_info.find('batchSize')
+      batchSize.text = f'{case.outerParallel}'
+    if case.innerParallel:


See the comment on os.cpu_count()

hopefully the check I added will catch this, let me know if you think anything further should be done

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:25:49Z

templates/template_driver.py

+      sampler = 'grid'
+    else:
+      sampler = 'opt'
+    print()


Empty print statement can be deleted.

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:27:50Z

templates/template_driver.py

+    # parallel
+    if case.innerParallel:
+      run_info.append(xmlUtils.newNode('internalParallel', text='True'))
+      run_info.find('batchSize').text = f'{case.innerParallel}'


See the comment on os.cpu_count().

same, let me know if you think anything more needs doing

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:30:54Z

src/Cases.py

+    parallel = InputData.parameterInputFactory('parallel', descr=r"""Describes how to parallelize this run.""")
+    parallel.addSub(InputData.parameterInputFactory('outer', contentType=InputTypes.IntegerType,
+        descr=r"""the number of parallel runs to use for the outer optimization run. The product of this
+              number and \xmlNode{inner} should be at most the number of parallel process availabe on


"available"

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:32:44Z

templates/template_driver.py

@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ class Template(TemplateBase, Base):

  var_template = xmlUtils.newNode('variable')
  var_template.append(xmlUtils.newNode('distribution'))
-  var_template.append(xmlUtils.newNode('grid', attrib={'type':'value', 'construction':'custom'}))
+  #var_template.append(xmlUtils.newNode('grid', attrib={'type':'value', 'construction':'custom'}))


This appears to be commented out, does it need to stay or can it be deleted?

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-18T17:45:19Z

src/Cases.py

+          if sub.getName() == 'outer':
+            self.outerParallel = sub.value
+          elif sub.getName() == 'inner':
+            self.innerParallel = sub.value


I tried running the htse test case and an error was thrown because more cores were requested than available (my Windows machine has 8). I think it would be a good idea to check the number of available cores using "os.cpu_count()" and make sure that the user specified number is not greater than the maximum number available or some threshold. Generally, I try to only use max os.cpu_count() -1 cores so that it doesn't lock up my machine. Probably should add a debug or warning message if the user specifies too many cores and the number is adjusted downward to allow the case to run.

That's a good thought. That check won't work well when we're running on HPC, but we can follow up with that in a future PR where we auto-handle HPC stuff.

… resources

dgarrett622

Looks like the automated tests are failing and I think I know why. A quick fix and a comment to consider.

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-22T14:33:07Z

src/Cases.py

+      # check to see if the number of processes available can meet the request
+      detected = os.cpu_count() - 1 # -1 to prevent machine OS locking up
+      if detected < cores_requested:
+        self.raiseAWarning('System may be overloaded and greatly increase run time! ' +


Just a comment for consideration:

On my Windows machine, requesting more cores than you have available results in an error and RAVEN will not run, not sure what the behavior is on Mac or Linux. We could raise an error here or raise a warning and wait for RAVEN to throw an error later, either way is probably fine. I think the important thing is to inform the user that they requested more cores than the machine has available. If that particular error is thrown later, the user will have an idea as to why the simulations were not run.

Yeah, I don't love how this is handled generally speaking; I think handling it better in RAVEN may lead to sensible error messages so we don't duplicate that effort in HERON.

dgarrett622 · 2022-03-22T14:34:27Z

src/dispatch/pyomo_dispatch.py

@@ -303,7 +303,6 @@ def dispatch_window(self, time, time_offset,
      attempts += 1
      print(f'DEBUGG solve attempt {attempts} ...:')
      # solve
-      solve_options = {'threads': 2}
      soln = pyo.SolverFactory(self._solver).solve(m, options=solve_options)


I'm pretty sure this is what is causing the automated tests to fail. Removing the options=solve_options should fix this.

whoops! fixed.

PaulTalbot-INL added 7 commits September 16, 2021 16:31

stash

13675b2

updated to devel

1af85ce

stash

a6bb212

Merge branch 'devel' into htse_case

f19dd48

stash

8275bf2

first test case - simple

ff5e047

small gitignore update

97e47ab

PaulTalbot-INL marked this pull request as draft March 10, 2022 17:36

PaulTalbot-INL added 5 commits March 10, 2022 10:47

removing unfinished full HTSE case that doesn't run yet

94a6adc

mergefixes

a9b0fee

regolded because new default opt options get to solution faster

e67fd6e

regolded because diff default opt options get to soln faster

94940c0

removed glpk solver choice

c3be4bd

PaulTalbot-INL marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2022 21:08

PaulTalbot-INL requested a review from dgarrett622 March 17, 2022 21:10

dgarrett622 suggested changes Mar 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

review comments addressed; warning added for over-requesting parallel…

830e5e8

… resources

dgarrett622 suggested changes Mar 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

fixed missing dictionary

78f0f6a

dgarrett622 approved these changes Mar 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

dgarrett622 merged commit 00481ae into idaholab:devel Mar 22, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Workshop March 2022 Examples #139

Workshop March 2022 Examples #139

PaulTalbot-INL commented Mar 10, 2022 •

edited by dgarrett622

Loading

dgarrett622 left a comment •

edited

Loading

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022

dgarrett622 left a comment

dgarrett622 Mar 22, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 22, 2022

dgarrett622 Mar 22, 2022

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 22, 2022

Workshop March 2022 Examples #139

Workshop March 2022 Examples #139

Conversation

PaulTalbot-INL commented Mar 10, 2022 • edited by dgarrett622 Loading

Pull Request Description

What issue does this change request address?

What are the significant changes in functionality due to this change request?

For Change Control Board: Change Request Review

dgarrett622 left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dgarrett622 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PaulTalbot-INL commented Mar 10, 2022 •

edited by dgarrett622

Loading

dgarrett622 left a comment •

edited

Loading

PaulTalbot-INL Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

dgarrett622 Mar 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading