The COMPASS event store in 2002

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Object Persistency & Data Handling Session C - Summary Object Persistency & Data Handling Session C - Summary Dirk Duellmann.
Advertisements

23/04/2008VLVnT08, Toulon, FR, April 2008, M. Stavrianakou, NESTOR-NOA 1 First thoughts for KM3Net on-shore data storage and distribution Facilities VLV.
12. March 2003Bernd Panzer-Steindel, CERN/IT1 LCG Fabric status
Objectivity Data Migration Marcin Nowak, CERN Database Group, CHEP 2003 March , La Jolla, California.
CHEP04 - Interlaken - Sep. 27th - Oct. 1st 2004T. M. Steinbeck for the Alice Collaboration1/20 New Experiences with the ALICE High Level Trigger Data Transport.
CHEP04 - Interlaken - Sep. 27th - Oct. 1st 2004T. M. Steinbeck for the Alice Collaboration1/27 A Control Software for the ALICE High Level Trigger Timm.
Chapter 9: The Client/Server Database Environment
The Client/Server Database Environment
Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment V.Kolosov, I.Korolko, S.Makarychev ITEP Moscow.
2/10/2000 CHEP2000 Padova Italy The BaBar Online Databases George Zioulas SLAC For the BaBar Computing Group.
UNIX Unbounded 5 th Edition Amir Afzal Chapter 1 First Things First.
Lecture On Database Analysis and Design By- Jesmin Akhter Lecturer, IIT, Jahangirnagar University.
Test Of Distributed Data Quality Monitoring Of CMS Tracker Dataset H->ZZ->2e2mu with PileUp - 10,000 events ( ~ 50,000 hits for events) The monitoring.
CDF data production models 1 Data production models for the CDF experiment S. Hou for the CDF data production team.
Irina Sourikova Brookhaven National Laboratory for the PHENIX collaboration Migrating PHENIX databases from object to relational model.
Horst Fischer University Freiburg / CERN COMPASS Computing.
Finnish DataGrid meeting, CSC, Otaniemi, V. Karimäki (HIP) DataGrid meeting, CSC V. Karimäki (HIP) V. Karimäki (HIP) Otaniemi, 28 August, 2000.
David N. Brown Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Representing the BaBar Collaboration The BaBar Mini  BaBar  BaBar’s Data Formats  Design of the Mini 
The Client/Server Database Environment Ployphan Sornsuwit KPRU Ref.
Personal Computer - Stand- Alone Database  Database (or files) reside on a PC - on the hard disk.  Applications run on the same PC and directly access.
Database Architectures Database System Architectures Considerations – Data storage: Where do the data and DBMS reside? – Processing: Where.
9 February 2000CHEP2000 Paper 3681 CDF Data Handling: Resource Management and Tests E.Buckley-Geer, S.Lammel, F.Ratnikov, T.Watts Hardware and Resources.
4/5/2007Data handling and transfer in the LHCb experiment1 Data handling and transfer in the LHCb experiment RT NPSS Real Time 2007 FNAL - 4 th May 2007.
And Tier 3 monitoring Tier 3 Ivan Kadochnikov LIT JINR
The PHysics Analysis SERver Project (PHASER) CHEP 2000 Padova, Italy February 7-11, 2000 M. Bowen, G. Landsberg, and R. Partridge* Brown University.
PC clusters in KEK A.Manabe KEK(Japan). 22 May '01LSCC WS '012 PC clusters in KEK s Belle (in KEKB) PC clusters s Neutron Shielding Simulation cluster.
HIGUCHI Takeo Department of Physics, Faulty of Science, University of Tokyo Representing dBASF Development Team BELLE/CHEP20001 Distributed BELLE Analysis.
Integration of the ATLAS Tag Database with Data Management and Analysis Components Caitriana Nicholson University of Glasgow 3 rd September 2007 CHEP,
Computing R&D and Milestones LHCb Plenary June 18th, 1998 These slides are on WWW at:
Online Monitoring System at KLOE Alessandra Doria INFN - Napoli for the KLOE collaboration CHEP 2000 Padova, 7-11 February 2000 NAPOLI.
5 June 2003Alan Norton / Focus / EP Topics1 Other EP Topics Some 2003 Running Experiments - NA48/2 (Flavio Marchetto) - Compass (Benigno Gobbo) - NA60.
6 march Building the INFN Grid Proposal outline a.ghiselli,l.luminari,m.sgaravatto,c.vistoli INFN Grid meeting, milano.
Chapter 9  Definition of terms  List advantages of client/server architecture  Explain three application components:
Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment Viktor Kolosov (ITEP Moscow) Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)
Andrea Valassi (CERN IT-DB)CHEP 2004 Poster Session (Thursday, 30 September 2004) 1 HARP DATA AND SOFTWARE MIGRATION FROM TO ORACLE Authors: A.Valassi,
Batch Software at JLAB Ian Bird Jefferson Lab CHEP February, 2000.
January 20, 2000K. Sliwa/ Tufts University DOE/NSF ATLAS Review 1 SIMULATION OF DAILY ACTIVITITIES AT REGIONAL CENTERS MONARC Collaboration Alexander Nazarenko.
Markus Frank (CERN) & Albert Puig (UB).  An opportunity (Motivation)  Adopted approach  Implementation specifics  Status  Conclusions 2.
ATLAS Distributed Analysis DISTRIBUTED ANALYSIS JOBS WITH THE ATLAS PRODUCTION SYSTEM S. González D. Liko
The Database Project a starting work by Arnauld Albert, Cristiano Bozza.
Jianming Qian, UM/DØ Software & Computing Where we are now Where we want to go Overview Director’s Review, June 5, 2002.
Barthélémy von Haller CERN PH/AID For the ALICE Collaboration The ALICE data quality monitoring system.
Compute and Storage For the Farm at Jlab
Giovanna Lehmann Miotto CERN EP/DT-DI On behalf of the DAQ team
Chapter 9: The Client/Server Database Environment
The Client/Server Database Environment
CMS High Level Trigger Configuration Management
Pasquale Migliozzi INFN Napoli
LHC experiments Requirements and Concepts ALICE
Scalability to Hundreds of Clients in HEP Object Databases
Bernd Panzer-Steindel, CERN/IT
The ZEUS Event Store An object-oriented tag database for physics analysis Adrian Fox-Murphy, DESY CHEP2000, Padova.
LHCb Computing Model and Data Handling Angelo Carbone 5° workshop italiano sulla fisica p-p ad LHC 31st January 2008.
The Client/Server Database Environment
The Client/Server Database Environment
Chapter 9: The Client/Server Database Environment
ProtoDUNE SP DAQ assumptions, interfaces & constraints
Ákos Frohner EGEE'08 September 2008
Proposal for the LHCb Italian Tier-2
CTA: CERN Tape Archive Overview and architecture
Computing Infrastructure for DAQ, DM and SC
OffLine Physics Computing
Grid Canada Testbed using HEP applications
Chapter 2 Database Environment Pearson Education © 2009.
COMPASS off-line computing
Database Environment Transparencies
Characteristics of Reconfigurable Hardware
Simulation in a Distributed Computing Environment
ATLAS DC2 & Continuous production
Chapter-1 Computer is an advanced electronic device that takes raw data as an input from the user and processes it under the control of a set of instructions.
Presentation transcript:

The COMPASS event store in 2002 CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 The COMPASS event store in 2002 Presented by Vinicio Duic Massimo Lamanna IT Division CERN - CH On leave from INFN Trieste - Italy Vinicio Duic INFN Trieste - Italy

Summary COMPASS experiment Off-Line System Overview Data Model Adopted Data Storage Strategies 2002 Data Taking 2002 Data Storage & Processing Conclusions CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Fixed-target experiment at CERN SPS COMPASS Experiment (Common Muon-Proton Apparatus for Structure & Spectroscopy) Fixed-target experiment at CERN SPS Broad physics programme (m & p beams) Different apparatus set-ups High intensities and trigger rates Large accumulated data sets 1010 events/y ´ 30 kB/event = 300 TB/y High data-acquisition rate (35 MB/s) Design figures CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Centralised Data Storage The off-line system: choices Storage High data flux from on-line Huge amount of data (300 TB/y, many years of data taking) Continuous access from collaboration institutes Centralised Data Storage (transfer from exp. hall to tape drives -9540a in 2002, 9540b in 2003- in the computing centre through dedicated optic fibre) Processing Long period data taking Þ quasi on-line reconstruction Complex reconstruction Þ ~20k SI2000 (i.p.40k req’d) Wide physics programme Þ flexibility Design figures FARM of PC’s (need parallel reconstruction to get high performance/cost) CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

The off-line system: choices Reconstruction Reconstruction complexity OOP (C++) Flexibility Code handling CORAL (COmpass Reconstruction and AnaLysis) base components abstract interface to event-reconstruction components abstract interfaces to external packages in particular to access the data (DB, online files, …) components for reconstruction interchangeable, to suit reconstruction to different needs CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Data Model Collected data are shaped into objects (C++), stored hierarchically by Objectivity/DB Run DB DST DBs Disc Resident (metadata) Held on tert. MS Event DB RAW DBs CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Data Storage: CDR Design speed: 35 MB/s Data-Servers (Up to 20 X 0.5 TB) Thanks B. Gobbo INFN Trieste - It On-line PC’s (3.5 TB) CASTOR Execution Hosts (400) IN 2002 COMPASS has been CASTOR (heavy ) user No 1 CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Data taking 2002 4.5 TB! Design rate (35 MB/s) Collected sample Data (TB) Design rate (35 MB/s) Time (days) Collected sample (270 TB) In ~100 days of DAQ Data (TB) CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

At-peak: Network Activity b a c Traffic to tape a c b (Same time windows) CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

At-peak: DB Input Activity Traffic to tape b (Same time windows) CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Objectivity/DB pro’s & con’s Logical/physical layer separation independent from HSM details Clean integration w/t HSM Client driven Nice performances High concurrency in production (> 400 clients) Weak on client abort Oocleanup sometimes tricky Poor flexibility for read locks (100 clients) LockServer, AMS (network server): 1 box ´ process CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Migration to Oracle CERN Contract with Objectivity terminated; they have chosen Oracle as new DBMS PAST (Objectivity/DB 6.1.3) In the ODBMS: Metadata & Associations Raw Data Reconstructed Events Conditions In plain files: DB overhead ~30% of Raw Data size (turns into ~6% on tape) FUTURE (ORACLE 9i) In the ORDBMS: Relations (metadata) In plain files: Raw Data Reconstructed Events Conditions DB overhead: ~0.3% of Raw Data size CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Oracle vs Objectivity COMPASS only has to get » 35 MB/s CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

2002 Data Production DST on 2001 data (103 GB) with OBJY DST on 2002 data with OBJY Big; i/o size: 80 TB RAWs processed (multiple processing) 5.7 TB DSTs produced DST on 2002 data with ORACLE Just started (yet 1.3 TB DSTs produced) Incremental changes on DST formats + CORAL tuning (algorithm, calibrations,…) CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Oracle Production Input: Output: 17 TB RAWs 1.3 TB DSTs (8% of total) Feb. - Mar. 2003 CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

Batch CPU Load at CERN COMPASS 320 280 240 200 160 120 80 40 127 131 2002 2003 DAQ* Prod. Prod. 320 280 240 200 160 120 80 40 127 131 135 139 143 147 151 203 207 211 215 219 223 227 231 235 239 243 247 251 303 307 311 COMPASS CPU Time (NCU khrs) Objectivity/DB Oracle * CDR does not use the batch CPU Week CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic

COMPASS experience Usage of very different technologies Objectivity/DB Oracle Continuity in data access Only new I/O plug-in (CORAL good design!) Huge data migration (see M. Nowak’s talk) Very large data rate and data sizes Comparable to one LHC experiment Heavy duty usage of CASTOR in production CHEP03 - March 24-28 2003 M. Lamanna & V. Duic