Minor update to BW test page

Work towards lhcb-dpa/project#268. Link to lhcb-core/LHCbPR2HD!264 (merged). The updated webpages can be previewed here:

• hlt2 example
• spruce example

Addressing the following comments from @erodrigu :

Can we get a header with the slot and date, which identifies the thing, so say "Slot lhcb-head, 2023-08-15" or similar?

Now the start and end times are posted to the page so that one could know how long does the test take.

The really useful table contains lines such as

| 6.717 | 11.75475 | 38.215658 | 0.449216 | 32.157306 | 0.378001 |
|-------|----------|-----------|----------|-----------|----------|

We should really round those numbers to get something meaningful ;-).

Now all numbers in tables are rounded with 3 significant digits (some are 2 because the last digit is zero).

The table gives bandwidth in GB/s (good) but then the plots down in the page rather use MB/s. Better use GB/s everywhere (also in what gets posted via the GitLab bot, BTW).

Now use GB/s everywhere, also for the Gitlab feedback of the Sprucing throughput test. The x-axis of the BW plots now ranges in (-4. 0) (BW numbers are 0.x in terms of GB/s).

Use "s" for the unit of wall time, not "Sec". Again for consistency.

Done

Some other comments are already addressed before, some are not addressed yet and I put them in the description of the issue.

cc @rjhunter @lugrazet @nskidmor @abertoli

added lhcb-head label

requested review from @rjhunter

assigned to @shunan

changed title from Fixed formatting to Minor update to BW test page

mentioned in merge request lhcb-core/LHCbPR2HD!264 (merged)

changed the description

• [2023-10-20 00:03] Validation started with lhcb-head#3728
• [2023-10-26 00:03] Validation started with lhcb-head#3733

removed lhcb-head label

Thanks very much for this @shunan!

I see from the Sprucing example that the bandwidth numbers still have a lot of digits for my taste, though. The rest looks good.

I can understand why you made some plots in log scale when having all WGs together. As for the per-WG plots seen at "Show plots split by WGs", I would say it is more useful to see things on a linear x-axis scale. Same for the data sizes. It makes the distributions easier to see and understand, and that is appreciable when looking at tails/trends for a single WG IMO.

I did not look much more since rather loaded, but things are looking very nice and I look forward to the rest .

Looking through now.

Hi @shunan, thanks for the work. Please find some comments from me.

added 1 commit

• 235bd282 - implement suggestions

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 6afc1383 - remove hard-code

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 854e44af - Fixed formatting

Compare with previous version