1. ICPP 2012 Indexing and Parallel Query Processing Support for Visualizing Climate Datasets Yu Su*, Gagan Agrawal*, Jonathan Woodring † *The Ohio State University † Los Alamos National Laboratory

2. ICPP 2012 Outline Motivation and Introduction Background System Overview and Optimization Experiment Conclusion

3. ICPP 2012 Motivation Science becomes increasingly data driven; Strong desire for efficient data visualization; Challenges: –Fast data generation speed –Slow disk IO and network speed –Worse performance during visualization –Different kinds of subsetting requests Difficult and Unnecessary to visualize all the data

4. ICPP 2012 Data Subsetting in Paraview A widely used data analysis and visualization application Problems: Load + Filter mode –Load the entire data set –Data filtering in visualization level Threshold Filter: based on values Extract Subset Filter: based on dimension info –Grid transformation needed during filtering Regular Structured Grid -> Unstructured Grid

5. ICPP 2012 A Faster Solution Subset at the I/O level –User specifies the subset in one query for both dimension and value ranges –Reduced I/O time and memory footprint SQL queries in ParaView –Query over Dimensions – API support –Query over Values - Indexing Bitmap Indices and Parallel Bitmap Indices –Efficient subsetting over values

6. ICPP 2012 Background: Bitmap Indexing Fastbit: widely used in Scientific Data Management Suitable for float value for binning small ranges Run Length Compression(WAH, BBC) –Compress bitvector based on continuous 0s or 1s

7. ICPP 2012 Bitmap Index and Dim Subset Run-length Compression(WAH, BBC) –Good: compression rate, fast bitwise operation; –Bad: ability to locate dim subset is lost; Two traditional methods: –With bitmap indices: post-filter on dim info; –Without bitmap indices: post-filter on values; Two-phase optimization: –Index Generate: Distributed Indices over sub-blocks; –Index Retrieval: Transform dim subsetting info into bitvectors, and support fast bitwise operation;

8. ICPP 2012 System Overview Parse the SQL expression Parse the metadata file Generate Query Request Index Generation if not generated; Index Retrieving after that.

9. ICPP 2012 Optimization 1: Distributed Index Generation Study relationship between Queries and Partitions. Partition the data based on Query Preference

10. ICPP 2012 Index Partition Strategy α rate: Participation rate of data elements –Number of elements in indexing / Total data size –Worst: All elements have to be involved –Ideal: Elements exact the same as dim subset Partition Strategies: –Strategy 1: α is proportional to dim subsetting percentage and inversely proportional to number of partitions. –Strategy 2: In general cases where subsetting over each dimension has a similar probability, the partition should have equal preference over each dim. –Strategy 3: If queries only include a subset of dims, the partition should also be based on these dims.

11. ICPP 2012 Optimization 2: Index Retrieval Post-filter?

12. ICPP 2012 Parallel Index Architecture L3: data block L1: data file L2: variable

13. ICPP 2012 Experiment Setup Goals: –SQL subsetting vs. Load + Filter in Paraview –Scalability of parallel indexing method –Indexing and Partition Strategy vs. FastQuery Dataset: –Parallel Ocean Program –Data size: 33.6 GB –Data format: NetCDF(array based) Environment: –IBM Xeon Cluster 8 cores, 2.53GHZ –12 GB memory

14. ICPP 2012 Efficiency Comparison with Filtering in Paraview Data size: 5.6 GB Input: 400 queries Depends on subset percentage General index method is better than filtering when data subset < 60% Two phase optimization achieved a 0.71 – 11.17 speedup compared with filtering method Index m1: Bitmap Indexing, no optimization Index m2: Use bitwise operation instead of post-filtering Index m3: Use both bitwise operation and index partition Filter: load all data + filter

15. ICPP 2012 Memory Comparison with Filtering in Paraview Data size: 5.6 GB Input: 400 queries Depends on subset percentage General index method has much smaller memory cost than filtering method Two phase optimization only has small extra memory cost Index m1: Bitmap Indexing, no optimization Index m2: Use bitwise operation instead of post-filtering Index m3: Use both bitwise operation and index partition Filter: load all data + filter

16. ICPP 2012 Scalability with Different Proc# Data size: 8.4 GB Proc#: 6, 24, 48, 96 Input: 100 queries X pivot: subset percentage Y pivot: time Each process take care of one sub-block Good scalability as number of processes increases

17. ICPP 2012 Alpha Rate with Different Proc# Data size: 8.4 GB Proc#: 6, 24, 48, 96 Input: 100 queries X pivot: subset percentage Y pivot: Alpha Rate More number of processes means more index partitions Good participation rate when selecting a smaller percentage data subset

18. ICPP 2012 Alpha Rate and IO Access Times Comparison with FastQuery FastQuery: Build relational table view over scientific dataset Difference: doesn’t consider multi-dimension data features Data size: 8.4 GB, 48 processes Query Type: value + 1 st dim, value + 2 nd dim, value + 3 rd dim, overall Input: 100 queries for each query type

19. ICPP 2012 Efficiency Comparison with FastQuery Data size: 8.4 GB Proc#: 48 Input: 100 queries for each query type Achieved a 1.41 to 2.12 speedup compared with FastQuery

20. ICPP 2012

21. Conclusion Big data issue in data analysis and visualization Find exact data subset in IO level with SQL interface and bitmap indexing A good speedup compared with filtering method Data partition strategy and parallel indexing A good speedup compared with FastQuery

22. ICPP 2012 Thanks 22