Testbed Release Criteria and Plans WP8 Loose Cannons & App Representatives.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Object Oriented Analysis And Design-IT0207 iiI Semester
Advertisements

Stephen Burke - WP8 Status - 9/5/2002 Partner Logo WP8 Status Stephen Burke, PPARC/RAL.
Stephen Burke - WP8 Status - 14/2/2002 Partner Logo WP8 Status Stephen Burke, PPARC/RAL.
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 22 April 2002 EU DataGrid Testbed EU DataGrid Software releases Testbed 1 Job Lifecycle Authorisation at your site More.
Test process essentials Riitta Viitamäki,
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 22 April 2002 EU DataGrid Testbed EU DataGrid Software releases Testbed 1 Job Lifecycle Authorisation at your site More.
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 6 November Old version of website was maintained from Unix command line => needed (gsi)ssh access.
Software Engineering. How many lines of code? Average CS1004 assignment: 200 lines Average CS4115 project: 5000 lines Corporate e-commerce project: 80,000.
Software Engineering.
27-29 September 2002CrossGrid Workshop LINZ1 USE CASES (Task 3.5 Test and Integration) Santiago González de la Hoz CrossGrid Workshop at Linz,
Chapter 25 – Configuration Management 1Chapter 25 Configuration management.
Software Documentation Written By: Ian Sommerville Presentation By: Stephen Lopez-Couto.
Release & Deployment ITIL Version 3
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 22 April 2002 UK Rollout and Support Plan Aim of this talk is to the answer question “As a site admin, what are the steps.
Scenario testing Tor Stålhane. Scenario testing – 1 There are two types of scenario testing. Type 1 – scenarios used as to define input/output sequences.
EGEE (EU IST project) – Networking Activities 4: biomedical applications NA4 Biomedical Activities Johan Montagnat First EGEE Meeting Cork,
Module CC3002 Post Implementation Issues Lecture for Week 6 AY 2013 Spring.
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 26 June 2001 WG-H / Support status Packaging / RPM’s UK + EU DG CA’s central grid-users file grid “ping”
5 November 2001F Harris GridPP Edinburgh 1 WP8 status for validating Testbed1 and middleware F Harris(LHCb/Oxford)
C. Loomis – Testbed Status – 28/01/2002 – n° 1 Future WP6 Tasks Charles Loomis January 28, 2002
Discussion of Assignment 9 1 CSE 2312 Computer Organization and Assembly Language Programming Vassilis Athitsos University of Texas at Arlington.
1 1 Vulnerability Assessment of Grid Software Jim Kupsch Associate Researcher, Dept. of Computer Sciences University of Wisconsin-Madison Condor Week 2006.
EMI INFSO-RI SA2 - Quality Assurance Alberto Aimar (CERN) SA2 Leader EMI First EC Review 22 June 2011, Brussels.
EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST Testing processes Leanne Guy Testing activity manager JRA1 All hands meeting,
Program Development Life Cycle (PDLC)
1 Project Information and Acceptance Testing Integrating Your Code Final Code Submission Acceptance Testing Other Advice and Reminders.
Design and Programming Chapter 7 Applied Software Project Management, Stellman & Greene See also:
CS 350, slide set 10 M. Overstreet Old Dominion University Spring 2006.
Dr. Tom WayCSC Testing and Test-Driven Development CSC 4700 Software Engineering Based on Sommerville slides.
Moving Around in Scratch The Basics… -You do want to have Scratch open as you will be creating a program. -Follow the instructions and if you have questions.
Continuous Integration and Code Review: how IT can help Alex Lossent – IT/PES – Version Control Systems 29-Sep st Forum1.
Unit 2 (task 28) In this PowerPoint I will tell you about 7 important IT job roles and if a candidate might want one what he would have to do to get one.
C. Loomis – Integration Status- October 31, n° 1 Integration Status October 31, 2001
Responsibilities of ROC and CIC in EGEE infrastructure A.Kryukov, SINP MSU, CIC Manager Yu.Lazin, IHEP, ROC Manager
First attempt for validating/testing Testbed 1 Globus and middleware services WP6 Meeting, December 2001 Flavia Donno, Marco Serra for IT and WPs.
GLite – An Outsider’s View Stephen Burke RAL. January 31 st 2005gLite overview Introduction A personal view of the current situation –Asked to be provocative!
Preparation for Integration Organized access to the code WP6 infrastructure (MDS-2, RC, …) Input from WPs on requirements,... Acquire experience with Globus.
Chapter 6 CASE Tools Software Engineering Chapter 6-- CASE TOOLS
Chapter 8 Lecture 1 Software Testing. Program testing Testing is intended to show that a program does what it is intended to do and to discover program.
MIS 7003 MBA Core Course in MIS Professor Akhilesh Bajaj The University of Tulsa Introduction to S/W Engineering © All slides in this presentation Akhilesh.
Site Management & Support for 1.2 Technical Problems Other Problems What is a Sysadmin? What is wrong with the way we work? Me as a Site Manger Me as an.
Andrew McNab - Manchester HEP - 17 September 2002 UK Testbed Deployment Aim of this talk is to the answer the questions: –“How much of the Testbed has.
CSC 480 Software Engineering Test Planning. Test Cases and Test Plans A test case is an explicit set of instructions designed to detect a particular class.
Security Vulnerability Identification and Reduction Linda Cornwal, JRA1, Brno 20 th June 2005
European Middleware Initiative (EMI) The Software Engineering Model Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Interim Project Director.
LCG CERN David Foster LCG WP4 Meeting 20 th June 2002 LCG Project Status WP4 Meeting Presentation David Foster IT/LCG 20 June 2002.
Oman College of Management and Technology Course – MM Topic 7 Production and Distribution of Multimedia Titles CS/MIS Department.
Report from GSSD Storage Workshop Flavia Donno CERN WLCG GDB 4 July 2007.
Yeah but.. What do I do? Software Leadership Dan Fleck 2007.
INFSO-RI SA2 ETICS2 first Review Valerio Venturi INFN Bruxelles, 3 April 2009 Infrastructure Support.
© 2015 albert-learning.com How to talk to your boss How to talk to your boss!!
Plans for D7.7 The Security Report on the Final Project Release Linda Cornwall, RAL.
CERN IT Department CH-1211 Genève 23 Switzerland t Managing changes - 1 Managing changes Olof Bärring WLCG 2009, 14 th November 2008.
Lecturer: Eng. Mohamed Adam Isak PH.D Researcher in CS M.Sc. and B.Sc. of Information Technology Engineering, Lecturer in University of Somalia and Mogadishu.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE File Transfer Software and Service SC3 Gavin McCance – JRA1 Data Management Cluster Service.
CERN 1 DataGrid Architecture Group Bob Jones CERN.
EMI INFSO-RI SA2: Quality Assurance Status Report Alberto Aimar(SA2) SA2 Leader EMI First EC Review 22 June 2011, Brussels.
WP3 WP3 at Budapest 2/9/2002 Steve Fisher / RAL. WP3 Steve Fisher/RAL - 2/9/2002WP3 at Budapest2 Summary News –EDG Retreat –EDG Tutorials –Quality –Release.
The Great Migration: From Pacman to RPMs Alain Roy OSG Software Coordinator.
14 June 2001LHCb workshop at Bologna1 LHCb and Datagrid - Status and Planning F Harris(Oxford)
Chapter 9 Testing the System 9.1 Principles of System Testing Focus A: The objective of unit and integration ensure the code implemented the design.
Software Development. The Software Life Cycle Encompasses all activities from initial analysis until obsolescence Analysis of problem or request Analysis.
Chapter 25 – Configuration Management 1Chapter 25 Configuration management.
Software Documentation
Quality Control in the dCache team.
Leanne Guy EGEE JRA1 Test Team Manager
Stephen Burke, PPARC/RAL Jeff Templon, NIKHEF
Applied Software Implementation & Testing
Chapter 25 – Configuration Management
Coordinate Operations Standard
Presentation transcript:

Testbed Release Criteria and Plans WP8 Loose Cannons & App Representatives

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Release criteria u Release 1.2: all WP managers successfully submit a job u Release 1.3: all WP managers must successfully replicate a file

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, The June 17 th Meeting u We thought it was a testbed release announcement a la October meeting last year u Others thought it was a discussion about the progress to release (basically todays meeting) u Others thought it was a PTB meeting about the release u Apparently apps were supposed to participate, but at least the LCs were unaware of this meeting u Needs to be better communication about the scope and purpose of meetings!!!

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Testbed Status and Deployment Assessment u Analysis of status of each WP’s products u Presentation of “acceptance criteria” u Comments on process

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 1 u F. Prelz did the perfect thing: debugged his software on the actual testbed! u Result: vast improvement in job submission (many bug fixes) and identification of remaining problems u Status: n Bug fixes early next week n Assuming they work, WP1 is ready for 1 week of application testing n Level reached: better than 96% success for JJ’s generic HEP application n Assuming JSS is also up >95% of the time, this is OK! u Redish’s law: 0.8  1, however 0.96 = 1

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 3 u Have identified the bug in MDS GRIS/GIIS system u NorduGrid identified the same bug and verified a patch for it fixed their problems u Patches are ready u Assuming patches work, WP3 is ready for 1 week of application testing u We want a commitment to debug and fix it if uptime decreases below 96% when deployed to application testbed

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 2 u As of yesterday 17.30, one file had been successfully replicated (but not stored in RC) u Exercise (two LCs plus one WP2 person) exposed several difficult configuration issues not addressed in beta3 u Conclusion: not ready for application testing u Not possible to give performance numbers since we don’t know where problems are! u Errors primarily due to not testing GDMP in realistic setting (real testbed with multiple VOs) u Lots of user education needed

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 5 u Primary application requirement: access to mass stores at CERN, Lyon, RAL u Workarounds exist but LCs aren’t aware of testbed- perspective (unprivileged normal Grid user on EDG testbed) instructions u Once documentation is transmitted, LCs need to test it u Conclusion: not ready for application testers u Not possible to give acceptance numbers since we don’t know where problems are.

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 4 u Main component needing work is information providers u Fix has been provided u Not tested as of Thursday 13 June u Perhaps ready for application testing? Should know today or early next week u Comment: information provider people need to submit jobs on EDG testbed in order to understand the problem better and discover bugs

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Work Package 7 u No application dependencies u OK for application viewpoint

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Short Term Path to Deployment: Our Proposal 1. Ideal situation: migrate packages to app testbed as they are ready (e.g. JSS approx end June) - probably unrealistic now. SO: 2. Put more application people on dev testbed 1. Request from F. Prelz: realistic stress of JSS (LC testing not chaotic enough) 2. Finish testing faster: don’t wait until everything works before we start! 3. We educate users on which components are “ready for test”: “please don’t ask about GDMP on iteam list until we tell you it’s ready” 4. Recommendation: once release is deemed ready, let current dev testbed “become” application testbed 1. Don’t need to wait for another round of installs 2. Migrate worker nodes over gradually 3. When 1.3 is ready, remaining nodes “become” dev testbed

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Longer Term Issues u Frequent vs. Infrequent Releases n Apps have several “we want it now” requests (ATF priority slides) n New functionality design untested/unverified without users (WP1) u Incremental Releases are GOOD! But not like now. n Integration is inefficient: MW don’t normally make unprivileged tests of installation or use of their products on EDG standard testbeds. Lots of work for sysadmins/ITeam n Integration is monolithic: “all or nothing”. n Even worse: too much version dependence: hard coded dependence on SPECIFIC versions of libs! Need to have honest dependencies: s No version dependence if libs are backwards compatible s Greater-or-equal dependence if not

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Who Owns the Configuration? u Much discussion recently on who is responsible for the configuration of software u Middleware needs to write & maintain config objects, and make sure they work on the official release u WP4 needs to provide documentation and consultation on how to make config objects u WP6 needs to help, as well as document resulting machine configurations for “manual install” people u Objects should be smarter; we have to tell them too much now, and what happens for “manual install” people??? n./configure n make n make install

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, WP6 Test Group u Can play a very important role u The current plan (only work on Frozen Releases!) is not optimal u Appear to be several “national” testing groups, would be beneficial to have some project-wide coordination u See next slide for how we believe they can have a great impact

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Our Idea for Deployment Plan u Middleware programmers do their own “unit” tests n As normal, non-privileged Grid user n Install and config on standard LCFG-driven testbed as non-privileged admin u deployment on dev testbed u Middleware + WP6 works to deploy n Alpha/beta release n Sysadmins install (only site specific config, no middleware config) n Test team tests, LCs are more than willing to help n Middleware + WP6 works to correct sw or config bugs u When they (test team/WP6/MW) think it is working, LCs test

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Not necessarily monolithic u No reason that all WPs must go thru same process at once u Perhaps this argues for the three-tiered approach: n Dev testbeds where stuff is tried n Validation testbeds where it is verified that it doesn’t break anything (Test Group) and can be installed by mortals (several external sysadmins) n Application testbed u Will need to be VERY strict about keeping the three testbeds as similar as possible: n All LCFG installed n No special libraries n Unprivileged-account testing the rule rather than the exception

WP8 – WP Managers Meeting, CERN, Impedance Mismatch u Iteam leader has a great project overview but lacks authority to make all crucial decisions u Project management has authority but not enough detailed knowledge to see realistically the crucial issues u Either Iteam leader should have more authority, or communication between this person and management should be better u WP6 needs more coordination and perhaps more manpower u We believe that WP managers as well as project technical coordinators would understand our suggestions if they actually tried to submit jobs