NERSC 1998 User Survey Results - Summary

T3E Comments: 11 responses

• 4 - Happy and satisfied with the T3E; positive experience
• 2 - unsatisfied with queue policy
  • queuing system extremely awkward; doesn't support very large simulations,
  • need longer runs
• 2 - slow turnaround (1 said especially for code development)
• 1 - Unhappy with technical aspects of machine
  • problem with temporary memory allocations
• 1 - unsatisfied with various aspects of programming environment
  • Fortran compiler has no VMS extensions,
• 1 - great response time
• 1 - quotas are too inflexible
• 1 - really need ssh
• 1 - need more time

Consulting services: 11 responses

• 10 - very good; friendly and patient; helpful; good teachers; responsive prompt
• 1 - uneven, depending on who your consultant is

General Comments: 10 responses

• 8 - can't rate what don't use (said by some who only use a subset of services)
• 1 - in general very pleased to have access to NERSC
• 1 - make use of collaboratory tools o help interaction between users and users and staff

PVP Comments: 8 responses

• 2 - C90 too busy (1 reasonable turnaround only in high priority queues; don't have enough allocation for that; queues should be restructured so that this isn't as big a factor)
• 2 - happy with the C90 (1 said didn't use J90 because too slow for small jobs)
• 1 - slow turnaround, especially for 512 MB queue which can't be done locally
• 1 - C90 response time slow
• 1 - poor J90 performance (worse than local workstation); will miss C90; hope J90++ a lot better
• 1 - systems change constantly; our programs stop running; please make changes more transparent
• 1 - don't understand J90 directory names

Account support services: 6 responses

• 2 - account setup too slow (1 specified for HPSS)
• 2 - unhappy with various parts of CUB
• when one types setcub view, one should see the percentage of time left in the repo
• allocations were assigned monthly, this was not convenient
• 1 - account creation and password change process too cumbersome since all requests have to go through PI or account manager, which can create delays
• 1 - staff are helpful

Allocations Process: 6 responses

• 2 - wants allocation process to be more flexible; more than once a year; easier to ask for more time throughout year
• 2 - wants to know evaluation criteria; allocation process seems to be a black box; requires "old boy" network support
• 1 - T3E allocation too small
• 1 - ERCAP interface needs improvement (too complicated)
• 1 - process cumbersome since all requests have to go through PI

Technical Information on Website: 6 responses

• 2 - sometimes hard to read/understand; needs to be better organized
• 1 - extremely helpful
• 1 - needs to cover more info not available through web pages
• 1 - better batch info: how to submit runs, max memory sizes for different
• 1 - give new users batch templates to aid the tutorial process queues, sample commands and scripts

File Systems: 4 responses

• 1 - happy with CFS
• 1 - CFS user interface is brain-dead
• 1 - don't have enough real info on HPSS; too big an effort to get a password there
• 1 - "Disk space management is a fiasco."

Network Access to NERSC: 1 response

• 1 - network access has improved, but still too slow