Job Priorities and Resource sharing in CMS A. Sciabà ECGI meeting on job priorities 15 May 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 14 Feb 2007 CMS Italia – Napoli A. Fanfani Univ. Bologna A. Fanfani University of Bologna MC Production System & DM catalogue.
Advertisements

29 June 2006 GridSite Andrew McNabwww.gridsite.org VOMS and VOs Andrew McNab University of Manchester.
The LHC experiments AuthZ Interoperation requirements GGF16, Athens 16 February 2006 David Kelsey CCLRC/RAL, UK
Role Based VO Authorization Services Ian Fisk Gabriele Carcassi July 20, 2005.
Implementing Finer Grained Authorization in the Open Science Grid Gabriele Carcassi, Ian Fisk, Gabriele, Garzoglio, Markus Lorch, Timur Perelmutov, Abhishek.
Andrew McNab - EDG Access Control - 14 Jan 2003 EU DataGrid security with GSI and Globus Andrew McNab University of Manchester
CoreGRID Workpackage 5 Virtual Institute on Grid Information and Monitoring Services Authorizing Grid Resource Access and Consumption Erik Elmroth, Michał.
The Origin of the VM/370 Time-sharing system Presented by Niranjan Soundararajan.
Ian M. Fisk Fermilab February 23, Global Schedule External Items ➨ gLite 3.0 is released for pre-production in mid-April ➨ gLite 3.0 is rolled onto.
Accounting Update Dave Kant Grid Deployment Board Nov 2007.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE XACML and G-PBox update MWSG 14-15/09/2005 Presenter: Vincenzo Ciaschini.
VO Management in D-Grid, 2. WS, H. Enke (AstroGrid-D) AGD Grid Account Management.
OSG Services at Tier2 Centers Rob Gardner University of Chicago WLCG Tier2 Workshop CERN June 12-14, 2006.
OSG Middleware Roadmap Rob Gardner University of Chicago OSG / EGEE Operations Workshop CERN June 19-20, 2006.
BaBar Grid Computing Eleonora Luppi INFN and University of Ferrara - Italy.
Mine Altunay OSG Security Officer Open Science Grid: Security Gateway Security Summit January 28-30, 2008 San Diego Supercomputer Center.
Mar 28, 20071/9 VO Services Project Gabriele Garzoglio The VO Services Project Don Petravick for Gabriele Garzoglio Computing Division, Fermilab ISGC 2007.
Grid User Management System Gabriele Carcassi HEPIX October 2004.
David Adams ATLAS ADA, ARDA and PPDG David Adams BNL June 28, 2004 PPDG Collaboration Meeting Williams Bay, Wisconsin.
Open Science Grid Monitoring and Information Services Interoperability Breakout Session Shaowen Wang August 29, 2005 OSG Blueprint Meeting.
Maarten Litmaath (CERN), GDB meeting, CERN, 2006/02/08 VOMS deployment Extent of VOMS usage in LCG-2 –Node types gLite 3.0 Issues Conclusions.
AN INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK FOR VO-ORIENTED AUTHORIZATION, POLICY-BASED MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING Andrea Caltroni 3, Vincenzo Ciaschini 1, Andrea Ferraro 1,
Overall Goal of the Project  Develop full functionality of CMS Tier-2 centers  Embed the Tier-2 centers in the LHC-GRID  Provide well documented and.
June 24-25, 2008 Regional Grid Training, University of Belgrade, Serbia Introduction to gLite gLite Basic Services Antun Balaž SCL, Institute of Physics.
CERN Using the SAM framework for the CMS specific tests Andrea Sciabà System Analysis WG Meeting 15 November, 2007.
Stefano Belforte INFN Trieste 1 Middleware February 14, 2007 Resource Broker, gLite etc. CMS vs. middleware.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE LCAS/LCMAPS and WSS Site Access Control boundary conditions David Groep NIKHEF.
1 User Analysis Workgroup Discussion  Understand and document analysis models  Best in a way that allows to compare them easily.
Overview of Privilege Project at Fermilab (compilation of multiple talks and documents written by various authors) Tanya Levshina.
Role Based VO Authorization Services Ian Fisk Gabriele Carcassi July 20, 2005.
US LHC OSG Technology Roadmap May 4-5th, 2005 Welcome. Thank you to Deirdre for the arrangements.
1 Andrea Sciabà CERN Critical Services and Monitoring - CMS Andrea Sciabà WLCG Service Reliability Workshop 26 – 30 November, 2007.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE G-PBox Auth meeting 13/9/2005 Presenter: Vincenzo Ciaschini.
VO Privilege Activity. The VO Privilege Project develops and implements fine-grained authorization to grid- enabled resources and services Started Spring.
CERN IT Department CH-1211 Genève 23 Switzerland t Internet Services Job Priorities update Andrea Sciabà IT/GS Ulrich Schwickerath IT/FIO.
Derek Ross E-Science Department DCache Deployment at Tier1A UK HEP Sysman April 2005.
Glite. Architecture Applications have access both to Higher-level Grid Services and to Foundation Grid Middleware Higher-Level Grid Services are supposed.
USATLAS deployment We currently use VOMS Role based authorization in production within USATLAS. In the VO we have defined 4 groups/roles that satisfy our.
AstroGrid-D Meeting MPE Garching, M. Braun VO Management.
Testing and integrating the WLCG/EGEE middleware in the LHC computing Simone Campana, Alessandro Di Girolamo, Elisa Lanciotti, Nicolò Magini, Patricia.
OSG Site Admin Workshop - Mar 2008Using gLExec to improve security1 OSG Site Administrators Workshop Using gLExec to improve security of Grid jobs by Alain.
6 march Building the INFN Grid Proposal outline a.ghiselli,l.luminari,m.sgaravatto,c.vistoli INFN Grid meeting, milano.
DIRAC Pilot Jobs A. Casajus, R. Graciani, A. Tsaregorodtsev for the LHCb DIRAC team Pilot Framework and the DIRAC WMS DIRAC Workload Management System.
Data Placement Intro Dirk Duellmann WLCG TEG Workshop Amsterdam 24. Jan 2012.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Update Authorization Service Christoph Witzig,
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE Policy management and fair share in gLite Andrea Guarise HPDC 2006 Paris June 19th, 2006.
The ATLAS Strategy for Distributed Analysis on several Grid Infrastructures D. Liko, IT/PSS for the ATLAS Distributed Analysis Community.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Study on Authorization Christoph Witzig,
Status of gLite-3.0 deployment and uptake Ian Bird CERN IT LCG-LHCC Referees Meeting 29 th January 2007.
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE VO Authorization in EGEE Erwin Laure EGEE Technical Director Joint EGEE and OSG Workshop.
OSG PKI Transition Impact on CMS. Impact on End User After March , DOEGrids CA will stop issuing or renewing certificates. If a user is entitled.
OSG Status and Rob Gardner University of Chicago US ATLAS Tier2 Meeting Harvard University, August 17-18, 2006.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Job Management Claudio Grandi.
SAM architecture EGEE 07 Service Availability Monitor for the LHC experiments Simone Campana, Alessandro Di Girolamo, Nicolò Magini, Patricia Mendez Lorenzo,
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE Padova site report Massimo Sgaravatto On behalf of the JRA1 IT-CZ Padova group.
CERN IT Department CH-1211 Genève 23 Switzerland t CMS SAM Testing Andrea Sciabà Grid Deployment Board May 14, 2008.
Antonio Fuentes RedIRIS Barcelona, 15 Abril 2008 The GENIUS Grid portal.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE GUMS vs. LCMAPS Oscar Koeroo.
Why you should care about glexec OSG Site Administrator’s Meeting Written by Igor Sfiligoi Presented by Alain Roy Hint: It’s about security.
BaBar & Grid Eleonora Luppi for the BaBarGrid Group TB GRID Bologna 15 febbraio 2005.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE Simone Campana (CERN) Job Priorities: status.
LCG A few slides for the discussion on VOMS Kors Bos, NIKHEF, Amsterdam GDB Oct.4, 2006.
1-2 March 2006 P. Capiluppi INFN Tier1 for the LHC Experiments: ALICE, ATLAS, CMS, LHCb.
Dynamic Accounts: Identity Management for Site Operations Kate Keahey R. Ananthakrishnan, T. Freeman, R. Madduri, F. Siebenlist.
Farida Naz Andrea Sciabà
CREAM-CE/HTCondor site
ALICE – FAIR Offline Meeting KVI (Groningen), 3-4 May 2010
N. De Filippis - LLR-Ecole Polytechnique
QoS and SLA in INFN Grid INFN team: Andrea Ceccanti, Vincenzo Ciaschini, Alberto Forti, Andrea Ferraro, Valerio Venturi Location Catania (Italy) Date 4/3/2008.
The LHCb Computing Data Challenge DC06
Presentation transcript:

Job Priorities and Resource sharing in CMS A. Sciabà ECGI meeting on job priorities 15 May 2006

Outline CMS requirements Current group/role structure Job priorities in LCG and OSG Current functionalities Job priorities today Job priorities in gLite 3 Plans for CSA06 Proposed group structure Conclusions

CMS Requirements Users can belong to groups and have special roles different groups and roles can be attached to each job user A submits a production job and after a Susy analysis job control over a group can be delegated at least, O(10) relevant group/role combinations expected Not all jobs are equal “MC production jobs are allocated 50% of CPU at site X” but if MC jobs are not submitted, their share is reused by other activities The VO manager and the site manager can assign and change resource shares changes must be effective in < 1 day All users are equal if they do the same work fair share among users user A cannot block access to site X for other users just because he submitted jobs users can have different priorities depending on the kind of their jobs

Current CMS group/role structure GroupRoleDescription /cmsall CMS users cmsusernormal user in OSG lcgadminto install CMS software in LCG productionMC production in LCG /cms/productionfor testing /cms/analysisfor testing /cms/HeavyIonsfor heavy ions studies /cms/Higgsfor Higgs studies /cms/StandardModelfor SM studies /cms/Susyfor Susy studies /cms/uscmsUS-CMS users cmsfrontierFrontier operations cmsphedexPhEDEx operations cmsprodMC production in OSG cmssoftto install CMS software in OSG cmst1adminOSG Tier-1 administrators cmst2adminOSG Tier-2 administrators cmsusernormal user in OSG Two independent groups/roles structures LCG only lcgadmin role used OSG only /cms and /cms/uscms groups used only cms* roles used some logical overlap should eventually reconcile Relevant to OSG Relevant to LCG

Current functionalities LCG & OSG groups/roles can be mapped to local UNIX accounts/groups LCG uses LCMAPS, OSG uses GUMS the user’s proxy used to submit the job determines to which local UNIX account/group the user is mapped the batch system can be configured to give different priorities to different local accounts/groups the configuration is batch system-specific LCG the Resource Broker is “blind” to groups/roles the ranking of the CEs assumes that all jobs are equal it is a problem only if a job can run on many possible CEs

Job priorities today LCG jobs are not differentiated by group/role lcgadmin: special write privileges for SW installation job scheduling is “first come, first served” OSG jobs are differentiated by role cmsuser: default batch priority cmsprod: very high batch priority cmssoft: default batch priority, special write privileges for SW installation

Job priorities in gLite User domain Job proxies have a primary group and a role (optional) Site domain LCMAPS maps the group/role to a UID/GID The batch system is configured to give the appropriate resource shares to all GIDs The CE publishes the no. of running/waiting jobs, of free slots, etc. specific to each group/role Workload management system domain The Resource Broker selects the best CE for the job based on the information specific to the job’s group/role Policy management Manual changes of configuration G-PBox Job /cms/Higgs LCMAPS ShareAShareBShareC VOView Name: ShareA ACL: /cms/Higgs VOView Name: ShareB ACL: /cms/... VOView Name: ShareC ACL: /atlas/... Information System Computing element Resource Broker

Proposed group structure for data processing ActivityPurposeImplementation Monte Carlo production Specific VOMS group High priority High priority simulation at T2’s+specific role mapped to a UID with high priority Normal priority CMS simulation at T2’s+specific role mapped to a pool of UID Low Priority Backfill simulation at T2’s+specific role mapped to a UID with low priority Reconstruction Specific VOMS group High priority High priority re-reconstruction at T1’s+specific role mapped to a UID with high priority Normal priority CMS re-reconstruction at T1’s+specific role mapped to a pool of UID Low priority Backfill re-reconstruction at T1’s+specific role mapped to a UID with low priority Analysis ~20 dedicated analysis groups Analysis coordinator Common analysis format and event skimming production (T1+T2) +specific role mapped to a pool of UID with high priority Analysis user

Other groups ActivityPurposeImplementation SW administrator Installation of CMS SW and site configuration files Specific role mapped to a pool of UID Frontier Central Maintenance of frontier server or cache Specific role mapped to a UID PhEDEx Potential central maintenance and monitoring of PhEDEx Specific role mapped to a UID Services

Plans for CSA06 A VOMS group structure should be agreed at the start, it may be enough to separate “production” and “analysis” the group structure must be communicated to Tiers and converted in LCMAPS and GUMS configurations To do on OSG development not needed (at first approximation) have Tiers to implement the needed group structure and map to a predefined set of shares (2-4) To do on WLCG/EGEE development needed (see next slide) have Tiers to implement the needed group structure and map to a predefined set of shares (2-4) Priority management change the mapping from VOMS to local shares change the local shares? Maybe, in the future, if needed

Plans for WLCG/EGEE Implementation and testing plan for the required features approved by the experiments 1. prototype scheme to map VOMS groups/roles to pool accounts with the right UNIX GIDs  2. prototype scheme to map GIDs to shares for the batch system  3. adapt the CE information provider to publish the relevant information (VOViews)  4. modify the Resource Broker to match CEs by VOView information  5. dynamics: change fair shares, first “by ”, then via G-PBox  Testing started NIKHEF (Maui), CNAF (LSF) RAL to follow soon

Conclusions Job priorities are an absolute need for CSA06 need at least to separate production and analysis Implementation work needed on the EGEE side work plan well defined, work already started CMS will have to closely interact with involved Tiers centrally distributed mappings and policies