Energy-Proportional Computing: A New Definition - David Wood

Energy-Proportional Computing:
A New Definition
David A. Wood
Professor, Computer Sciences
2/4/16
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON
Outline
Background & Motivation
New ideals
New metrics
Management
Summary
2/4/16
Datacenter Energy Consumption

U.S. data center energy [NRDC, Anthesis]
2013: 91B KWh 34 coal-fired 500-MW power plants, 1 yr
2020: 140B KWh 50 coal-fired 500-MW power plants , 1 yr
$13B/yr electricity costs
Typical datacenter
energy consumption
breakdown
[Dimension Data]
2/4/16
PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

Building Load
Power
Total
Facility
Energy
IT Equipment
Energy
Cooling
PDUs
Switchgears
Generators
Chillers
UPS
Pumps
CRAHs
Misc
CRACs
DX
Lighting
Total Facility Energy

PUE =
IT Equipment Energy 1
2/4/16
IT Load
Servers
Storage
Networks
Monitors
Workstations
Laptops
[The Green Grid]
Datacenter Energy Consumption

U.S. data center energy [NRDC, Anthesis]
2013: 91B KWh 34 coal-fired 500-MW power plants, 1 yr
2020: 140B KWh 50 coal-fired 500-MW power plants , 1 yr
$13B/yr electricity costs
Typical datacenter
energy consumption
breakdown
[Dimension Data]
2/4/16

PUE =
2/4/16
[The Green Grid]

PUE > 1 energy waste due to non-IT infrastructure
Strong impact in reducing non-IT energy waste
PUE estimates for current datacenters
Allied Control: 1.02, Facebook: 1.08, Google: 1.08, avg. 1.12,
Green IT Cube: 1.07, Microsoft: 1.125, OVH: 1.09
Average: 1.7
Missing: IT equipment energy waste
This talk focuses on server energy
2/4/16
Energy Efficiency
Work Performance
=
Energy =
Power
Performance = Load served
Examples: BIPS/Watt, ssj_ops/Watt, Instructions/nJ,
max Emin
2/4/16
EP: Energy Proportionality

Work Performance
=
Energy =
Power
EP: Energy Work
[eliminates energy waste ]
equiv., Power Performance
equiv., constant
First proposed by Barroso and Hlzle, 2007
Does EP imply Emin? Converse? Identical goals?
2/4/16
Conventional Wisdom
We see that peak energy efficiency occurs at
peak utilization and drops quickly as utilization

decreases. Luiz Andr Barroso and Urs Hlzle, IEEE
Computer, 2007
Energy waste at low utilizations/loads
Servers are typically 10 50% loaded
EP as a primary design goal

Strong impact
Low idle power, wide dynamic power range
Later, Dynamic EP [Lo et al., ISCA 2014]
Accounts for unavoidable idle power
2/4/16
10
Example: SpecPower on Haswell

Java-based load-varying workload
3 calibration intervals to detect max. load (100%)
Measurement interval Loads: 100%, 90%, 80%, , 10%, Idle
Performance: transactions per second
Power: system power
Quad-core (eight-thread) Intel Haswell server
2/4/16
11
EP on Conventional Server
2/4/16
12
2/4/16
13
2/4/16
14
2/4/16
15
Results from 2014
[Lo, et al. ISCA 2014]
2/4/16
16
2/4/16
17
2/4/16
18
Efficiency of Conventional Server
2/4/16
19
Efficiency of Conventional Server
2/4/16
20
(more) Conventional Wisdom

In an energy-proportional system, explicit power
management is unnecessary, as power consumption

varies naturally with utilization. Meisner, Gold, Wenisch,
PowerNap: eliminating server idle power, ASPLOS 2009
Ideally systems would exhibit energy-
proportionality, wherein servers consume power in

proportion to their load. Meisner, Sadler, Barroso, Weber,
Wenisch, Power management of online data-intensive services, ISCA 2011
...; modern servers are only maximally efficient at
100%. Meisner, Wenisch, Does low-power design imply energy

efficiency for data centers?, ISLPED 2011
2/4/16
21
Current (Reconfigurable) Systems

Reconfigurable resources
DVFS
Number of cores
Threads per core
Prefetching
Cache size

Multiple configurations may serve the same load
Different power & energy consumptions
2/4/16
22
EP on Reconfigurable Systems
2/4/16
23
2/4/16
24
2/4/16
25
2/4/16
26
Pareto Frontier
Pareto efficiency/optimality
Vilfredo
Pareto
1848
1923
[Wikipedia]
Subset of (performance, power) tuples in state space

Cannot increase performance without also using more power
Cannot reduce power without also decreasing performance
States that achieve goals will lie on the frontier
Minimum E, ED, ED2,
Minimum power with/without a performance target
Maximum performance with/without a power cap

2/4/16
27
2/4/16
28
2/4/16
29
Reconfigurable System Efficiency
2/4/16
30
2/4/16
31
2/4/16
32
Limitations of conventional views

Systems may achieve better than ideal efficiency
Better than the best!!
Neither EP nor Dynamic EP is ideal
Conventional models based on fixed-resource
assumptions
Modern systems are highly reconfigurable
New need ideals and new metrics

Quantify energy waste w.r.t ideal
Quantify factors that contribute to waste
2/4/16
33
Outline
New ideals
New metrics
Management
Summary
2/4/16
34
Conventional Ideals
Design Ideal
For system designers
Help design energy efficient systems
Examples: EP
Helped drive down idle power in current systems
Operational Ideal
Characterizes maximum operating efficiency
Help system operators and OS schedulers?
Example: Dynamic EP
Quantifies divergence from ideal linear behavior
Need new ideals for reconfigurable systems

2/4/16
35
New Ideals
Design Ideal
EOP Energy Optimal Proportional
Determined by max
Current systems energy optimal configuration
Best we can do irrespective of of offered load
Operational Ideal
Dynamic EO Dyanamic Energy Optimal
Determined by the Pareto frontier
Realizable ideal for the current system
Best we can do for the offered load
2/4/16
36
Conventional vs New Ideals
2/4/16
37
New Design Ideal
2/4/16
38
New Operational Ideal
2/4/16
39
Conventional vs New Ideals

Conventional
New
Design
EP
EOP
Operational
Dynamic EP
Dynamic EO
Dynamic EP EP EOP
Dynamic EO EOP
non-Sub-Linear Dynamic EP Dynamic EO
2/4/16
40
Optimality vs Proportionality
Optimality at every load Proportionality
EOP is always proportional
Uses Emin at every load
Emin = Energy needed by EOP

Proportionality Optimality
EP may not be optimal
Uses Emin energy at every load
2/4/16
41
Goal Dependence
Minimize E
EOP uses power linearly proportional to load
Constant regardless of load
Minimize ED
EDOP uses power quadratically proportional to load
Minimize ED2
ED2OP uses power cubically proportional to load

2/4/16
42
Outline
New ideals
New metrics
Management
Summary
2/4/16
43

Building Load
Power
Total
Facility
Energy
IT Equipment
Energy
Cooling
PDUs
Switchgears
Generators
Chillers
UPS
Pumps
CRAHs
Misc
CRACs
DX
Lighting

PUE =
2/4/16
CPUE
?
IT Load
Servers
Storage
Networks
Monitors
Workstations
Laptops
[The Green Grid]
44

CPUE

PUE =
2/4/16
[The Green Grid]
45
CPUE: Computational PUE

Goal: To quantify waste in computational energy
Inspired by PUE
Informally:
Actual IT server energy

CPUE =
EOP server energy 1
Depends upon configuration c and load l > 0
Actual server energy with c at l E(c,l)

CPUE(c,l) =
= E
1
EOP server energy
min
E(c,l) = CPUE(c,l) Emin

CPUE(c,l) > 1 wastes energy
2/4/16
46
Decomposing CPUE
For configuration c and load l > 0
Actual server energy with c at l

CPUE(c,l) =
EOP energy
E(c,l)
= E
min
& max
:
=
& (c,l)
:
Iron Law
&:max
&:Pareto l
&:Pareto l
& c,l
:
= LUE() RUE(c,l)
2/4/16
47
Iron Law of Performance

Iron Law of Performance:

Factor performance to focus designers attention
I/P: Instruction set architectures, compilers, algorithms
CPI: Pipelines, caches, predictors, out-of-order execution
T/C: Technology, circuits, pipelines
2/4/16
48
Iron Law of Energy Efficiency

Iron Law of Energy Efficiency:
E(c,l) = LUE(l) RUE(c,l) Emin

Factor energy efficiency to focus designers attention
LUE: Load Usage Effectiveness
Operate server at efficient load level
RUE: Resource Usage Effectiveness

Configure server to run efficiently at a given load level
Emin: Optimal energy for a given computation on this server
2/4/16
49
2/4/16
50
2/4/16
51
2/4/16
52
2/4/16
53
Energy Waste: Root Cause Analysis

Non-optimal loads
LUE(l) > 1 energy waste
There exists another load that uses less energy
LUE(l) = 1 system operating with &max

Only at points where Dynamic EO and EOP lines meet
Non-optimal configurations
RUE(c,l) > 1 energy waste
There exists another configuration that uses less energy but can
serve the same load

RUE(c,l) = 1 c is at Dynamic EO
2/4/16
54
Outline
New ideals
New metrics
Management
Summary
2/4/16
55
Load Management
Goal: Choose l such that LUE(l) is reduced
Select subset of Dynamic EO close to EOP
Global: Inter-server
Load distribution among servers
Difficult for stateful, time-sensitive services
2/4/16
56
Load Management
Optimization problem
Assume n servers, ith servers Dynamic EO is described by set
{(xi,1, yi,1), , (xi, j, yi, j), }
Let L be the total load to be served
Minimize
Such that
Pwr = WXYZ V , ,
L WXYZ V , ,
Ii, j {0,1}
V , 1
for all i, j
for all i
Load for server i is V , ,

2/4/16
57
Configuration Management
Goal: Choose c such that RUE(c,l) is reduced
Operate system at/near Dynamic EO
Local: Intra-server
Existing Linux governors not adequate
Limited knobs (DVFS)
Ondemand governor peak performing configuration
Powersave governor (lowest frequency configuration)
Limits performance
Operates in high LUE region
2/4/16
58
Reactive Governor
Knobs: core frequency and cache prefetch enable
R(t): parametrized by length of interval = t ms
Track Active Cycles for last interval
Select highest frequency such that all cycles are expected to be
active
Exponential Ramp-up
Inspired by Ethernet backoff
If selected frequency current frequency
Increase selected frequency by step
Double step
Prefetch control
Profile with OFF and ON for (10 + 10) ms within every interval
2/4/16
59
Reactive Governor
PF
PF
perf1 >
perf2?
Y
PF
perf1 perf2
#Active Cycles
in last t ms?
Calculate target
freq (tfr)
tfrf?
ftfr
tfr+=step Y
step*=2
T=s T=s+10 T=s+20
N
Init step
T=s+t-20
f = current frequency
2/4/16
60
Reactive Governor
2/4/16
61
Reactive Governor: RUE
2/4/16
62
Reactive Governor
2/4/16
63
Reactive Governor: RUE
2/4/16
64
SLA-Aware Governors
Disconnect between user needs and OS governors
SLAs
Maximize energy efficiency
Subject to max. response time
Maximize performance within a power cap

RAPL mechanism only seems to deal with DVFS
Other knobs?
Minimize power for a performance target

Intel Skylake Speed Shift

Hardware P states (DVFS)
Other knobs?
OS specifies performance hints

2/4/16
65
Challenges
Available knobs?
Hardware has many knobs
But few exposed to operating system
Efficient construction of Pareto frontier (Dynamic EO)
Transition overhead
Speed Shift: 1 msec
Caches? Interconnects?
Measurement interval
RAPL: few (>1) ms
Wall power: 0.1 1 sec
2/4/16
66
RAPL Power System Power

Advantage: shorter reaction times
2/4/16
67
Summary
Conventional ideal models no longer adequate
EP does not imply Emin
New ideals
EOP as a primary design goal
Dynamic EO as a primary operational goal
New metrics: CPUE, LUE, RUE
Quantify & attribute server energy waste
New SLA-aware governors needed
2/4/16
68
Acknowledgments
Rathijit Sen
Ph.D. Candidate
Funding
NSF grant CCF-1218323
NSF grant CNS-1302260
Financial interest in AMD, Google
2/4/16
69
Backup
2/4/16
70
References
NRDC, Anthesis: http://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/data-
center-efficiency-assessment-IP.pdf
Dimension Data:
https://www.dimensiondata.com/Global/Downloadable%20D
ocuments/The%20Relationship%20Between%20Data%20Cen
tre%20Strategy%20and%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Whitepa
per.pdf
The Green Grid:
http://www.thegreengrid.org/~/media/WhitePapers/WP49PUE%20A%20Comprehensive%20Examination%20of%20the
%20Metric_v6.pdf
2/4/16
71
References
PUE numbers
Allied Control: http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1127920O/2phase-immersion-coolinga-revolution-in-data-center-efficiency.pdf
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PrinevilleDataCenter/app/399
244020173259/
Google: http://www.google.com/about/datacenters/efficiency/intern
al/index.html#measuring-efficiency
Green IT Cube: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Green-ITCube-Hocheffizientes-Supercomputer-Domizil-eingeweiht3082605.html
Microsoft: http://download.microsoft.com/download/8/2/9/8297F7
C7-AE81-4E99-B1DBD65A01F7A8EF/Microsoft_Cloud_Infrastructure_Datacenter_and_
Network_Fact_Sheet.pdf
OVH: https://www.ovh.com/ca/en/about-us/green-it.xml
Average: http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2014/06/0
2/survey-industry-average-data-center-pue-stays-nearly-flat-fouryears/
2/4/16
72

Energy-Proportional Computing: A New Definition - David Wood

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Energy-Proportional Computing: A New Definition - David Wood

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Energy-Proportional Computing:

Datacenter Energy Consumption

PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

Total Facility Energy

[The Green Grid]

Datacenter Energy Consumption

PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

Total Facility Energy

[The Green Grid]

PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

EP: Energy Proportionality

peak utilization and drops quickly as utilization

EP as a primary design goal

Example: SpecPower on Haswell

Quad-core (eight-thread) Intel Haswell server

Results from 2014

[Lo, et al. ISCA 2014]

Efficiency of Conventional Server

Efficiency of Conventional Server

(more) Conventional Wisdom

management is unnecessary, as power consumption

Ideally systems would exhibit energy-

proportionality, wherein servers consume power in

...; modern servers are only maximally efficient at

100%. Meisner, Wenisch, Does low-power design imply energy

Current (Reconfigurable) Systems

Subset of (performance, power) tuples in state space

Reconfigurable System Efficiency

Reconfigurable System Efficiency

Reconfigurable System Efficiency

Limitations of conventional views

New need ideals and new metrics

Need new ideals for reconfigurable systems

Conventional vs New Ideals

New Design Ideal

New Operational Ideal

Conventional vs New Ideals

Emin = Energy needed by EOP

PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

Total Facility Energy

[The Green Grid]

PUE: Power Usage Effectiveness

Total Facility Energy

[The Green Grid]

CPUE: Computational PUE

Actual IT server energy

Depends upon configuration c and load l > 0

Actual server energy with c at l E(c,l)

E(c,l) = CPUE(c,l) Emin

Actual server energy with c at l

Iron Law of Performance

Iron Law of Energy Efficiency

E(c,l) = LUE(l) RUE(c,l) Emin

RUE: Resource Usage Effectiveness

LUE: Load Usage Effectiveness

LUE: Load Usage Effectiveness

RUE: Resource Usage Effectiveness

RUE: Resource Usage Effectiveness

Energy Waste: Root Cause Analysis

LUE(l) = 1 system operating with &max

serve the same load

Load for server i is V , ,

T=s T=s+10 T=s+20

Reactive Governor: RUE