Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

SDDP.Asynchronous for MSPFormat #650

Closed
bonnkleiford opened this issue Aug 23, 2023 · 12 comments
Closed

SDDP.Asynchronous for MSPFormat #650

bonnkleiford opened this issue Aug 23, 2023 · 12 comments

Comments

@bonnkleiford
Copy link

bonnkleiford commented Aug 23, 2023 •
edited by odow
Loading

Hi Oscar,

How are you? I hope everything is well.

I am exploring the SDDP.Asynchronous feature of SDDPjl for the benchmarking. I tried to follow the documentation as much as I can but I got this error message:

You must supply an optimizer for the policy graph, either by passing
one to the `optimizer` keyword argument to `PolicyGraph`, or by
using `JuMP.set_optimizer(model, optimizer)`.

Stacktrace:
 [1] error(s::String)
   @ Base ./error.jl:35
 [2] _initialize_solver(node::SDDP.Node{String}; throw_error::Bool)
   @ SDDP ~/.julia/1.8/packages/SDDP/1uYYz/src/algorithm.jl:317
 [3] _initialize_solver(model::SDDP.PolicyGraph{String}; throw_error::Bool)
   @ SDDP ~/.julia/1.8/packages/SDDP/1uYYz/src/algorithm.jl:343
 [4] master_loop(async::SDDP.Asynchronous, model::SDDP.PolicyGraph{String}, options::SDDP.Options{String})
   @ SDDP ~/.julia/1.8/packages/SDDP/1uYYz/src/plugins/parallel_schemes.jl:238
 [5] train(model::SDDP.PolicyGraph{String}; iteration_limit::Nothing, time_limit::Int64, print_level::Int64, log_file::String, log_frequency::Int64, log_every_seconds::Float64, run_numerical_stability_report::Bool, stopping_rules::Vector{SDDP.AbstractStoppingRule}, risk_measure::SDDP.Expectation, sampling_scheme::SDDP.InSampleMonteCarlo, cut_type::SDDP.CutType, cycle_discretization_delta::Float64, refine_at_similar_nodes::Bool, cut_deletion_minimum::Int64, backward_sampling_scheme::SDDP.CompleteSampler, dashboard::Bool, parallel_scheme::SDDP.Asynchronous, forward_pass::SDDP.DefaultForwardPass, forward_pass_resampling_probability::Nothing, add_to_existing_cuts::Bool, duality_handler::SDDP.ContinuousConicDuality, forward_pass_callback::SDDP.var"#97#104", post_iteration_callback::SDDP.var"#98#105")
   @ SDDP ~/.julia/1.8/packages/SDDP/1uYYz/src/algorithm.jl:1100
 [6] top-level scope
   @ In[10]:1

This is what I did so far:

using SDDP, GLPK, Gurobi, DataFrames, CSV, Plots, HiGHS, NBInclude
using Distributed
Distributed.addprocs(5);

model = SDDP.MSPFormat.read_from_file("(01_7)_100")
SDDP.set_optimizer(model, Gurobi.Optimizer)

SDDP.train(model, time_limit = 10, print_level=1, log_frequency=1,
    # parallel_scheme = SDDP.Asynchronous())

I have here the json files for reproduction.

(01_7)_100.zip

Best,
@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 23, 2023

I cannot open the file because I don't have enough memory on my laptop:

julia> model = SDDP.MSPFormat.read_from_file("/tmp/(01_7)_100/(01_7)_100")
A policy graph with 2500 nodes.
 Node indices: 1766, ..., 306


julia> SDDP.set_optimizer(model, Gurobi.Optimizer)
ERROR: Gurobi Error 10001:

You probably need: https://odow.github.io/SDDP.jl/stable/guides/improve_computational_performance/#Initialization-hooks

SDDP.set_optimizer(model, Gurobi.Optimizer)
SDDP.train(
    model;
    parallel_scheme = SDDP.Asynchronous() do m::SDDP.PolicyGraph
        env = Gurobi.Env()
        JuMP.set_optimizer(m, () -> Gurobi.Optimizer(env))
    end,
)

But a much bigger problem is that SDDP.jl is not designed for lattices with 2500 nodes because it creates a separate JuMP model for each node in the lattice. I think I need to identify stagewise independent structure in the lattice.json and build that instead.

The asynchronous performance is probably also bad because of #599. For this problem you'll end up creating 2500 * 5 = 12,500 different Gurobi models...

@odow odow mentioned this issue Aug 24, 2023
Merged
@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 24, 2023

This uses #653 which is very important to ensure that only 25 subproblems get built instead of 2500.

The for-loop is a temporary fix for #654.

(base) oscar@Oscars-MBP /tmp % julia --project=sddp
               _
   _       _ _(_)_     |  Documentation: https://docs.julialang.org
  (_)     | (_) (_)    |
   _ _   _| |_  __ _   |  Type "?" for help, "]?" for Pkg help.
  | | | | | | |/ _` |  |
  | | |_| | | | (_| |  |  Version 1.6.7 (2022-07-19)
 _/ |\__'_|_|_|\__'_|  |  Official https://julialang.org/ release
|__/                   |

julia> using Distributed

julia> Distributed.addprocs(5);

julia> @everywhere begin
           import Pkg
           Pkg.activate("/tmp/sddp")
       end
  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`
      From worker 4:	  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`
      From worker 3:	  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`
      From worker 2:	  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`
      From worker 6:	  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`
      From worker 5:	  Activating environment at `/tmp/sddp/Project.toml`

julia> @everywhere begin
           using SDDP, Gurobi
       end

julia> model = SDDP.MSPFormat.read_from_file("/tmp/(01_7)_100/(01_7)_100")
A policy graph with 25 nodes.
 Node indices: 24, ..., 3


julia> SDDP.set_optimizer(model, Gurobi.Optimizer)

julia> for node in values(model.nodes)
           node.optimizer = Gurobi.Optimizer
       end

julia> SDDP.train(
           model;
           iteration_limit = 10,
           log_every_seconds = 0.0,
           parallel_scheme = SDDP.Asynchronous(; use_master = false) do m::SDDP.PolicyGraph
               env = Gurobi.Env()
               SDDP.set_optimizer(model, () -> Gurobi.Optimizer(env))
           end,
       )
-------------------------------------------------------------------
         SDDP.jl (c) Oscar Dowson and contributors, 2017-23
-------------------------------------------------------------------
problem
  nodes           : 25
  state variables : 1
  scenarios       : 1.00000e+50
  existing cuts   : false
options
  solver          : Asynchronous mode with 5 workers.
  risk measure    : SDDP.Expectation()
  sampling scheme : SDDP.InSampleMonteCarlo
subproblem structure
  VariableRef                             : [6, 6]
  AffExpr in MOI.EqualTo{Float64}         : [2, 2]
  VariableRef in MOI.GreaterThan{Float64} : [5, 5]
  VariableRef in MOI.LessThan{Float64}    : [1, 2]
numerical stability report
  matrix range     [1e+00, 1e+00]
  objective range  [1e+00, 9e+01]
  bounds range     [2e+02, 1e+06]
  rhs range        [6e+01, 2e+02]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 iteration    simulation      bound        time (s)     solves  pid
-------------------------------------------------------------------
         1   1.200143e+05  9.434539e+04  5.044423e+01       100   2
         2   1.346048e+05  9.434539e+04  5.202458e+01      2700   5
         3   1.262865e+05  9.434539e+04  5.213052e+01      2800   6
         4   1.280591e+05  9.434539e+04  5.214389e+01      2900   3
         5   1.309676e+05  9.434539e+04  5.215937e+01      3000   4
         6   1.179271e+05  9.906205e+04  5.217376e+01      3100   2
         7   1.029976e+05  1.019992e+05  5.218820e+01      3200   2
         8   1.140694e+05  1.022385e+05  5.220257e+01      3300   2
         9   1.132411e+05  1.022385e+05  5.221371e+01      3400   4
        10   1.006086e+05  1.025582e+05  5.222394e+01      3500   2
-------------------------------------------------------------------
status         : iteration_limit
total time (s) : 5.222394e+01
total solves   : 3500
best bound     :  1.025582e+05
simulation ci  :  1.188776e+05 ± 7.084132e+03
numeric issues : 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The 50 second start up latency is weird. But I don't have the time to look into it. I don't expect the asynchronous implementation to perform well in your benchmarks. See #599.

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 24, 2023

Should be fixed if you use ] add SDDP#master

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 24, 2023

Should be fixed by v1.6.2

@bonnkleiford
Copy link
Author

bonnkleiford commented Aug 24, 2023 via email

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 24, 2023

Is the library open-source yet? Without a formal spec or a bunch of examples, it's quite hard to know if I've implemented things correctly.

@bonnkleiford
Copy link
Author

bonnkleiford commented Aug 25, 2023 via email

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 25, 2023

Why does the library need to stay private until you've written the paper/submitted a thesis? It'd be easier to iterate and fix any problems if it was open. It doesn't need to be in a perfect state to begin with.

@bonnkleiford
Copy link
Author

bonnkleiford commented Aug 25, 2023 via email

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 30, 2023

Any update? If not, I will close this issue.

@bonnkleiford
Copy link
Author

bonnkleiford commented Aug 31, 2023 via email

@odow
Copy link
Owner

odow commented Aug 31, 2023

Closing for now. I opened a few issues at https://github.com/bonnkleiford/MSPLib-Library, so let's chat there.

@odow odow closed this as completed Aug 31, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@odow @bonnkleiford