POLITEHNICA University of Bucharest California Institute of Technology National Center for Information Technology Ciprian Mihai Dobre Corina Stratan MONARC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Network II.5 simulator ..
Advertisements

31/03/00 CMS(UK)Glenn Patrick What is the CMS(UK) Data Model? Assume that CMS software is available at every UK institute connected by some infrastructure.
Database Architectures and the Web
Highest Energy e + e – Collider LEP at CERN GeV ~4km radius First e + e – Collider ADA in Frascati GeV ~1m radius e + e – Colliders.
Grids: Why and How (you might use them) J. Templon, NIKHEF VLV T Workshop NIKHEF 06 October 2003.
September, 1999MONARC - Distributed System Simulation I.C. Legrand1 MONARC Models Of Networked Analysis at Regional Centers Iosif C. Legrand (CERN/CIT)
1 Software & Grid Middleware for Tier 2 Centers Rob Gardner Indiana University DOE/NSF Review of U.S. ATLAS and CMS Computing Projects Brookhaven National.
23/04/2008VLVnT08, Toulon, FR, April 2008, M. Stavrianakou, NESTOR-NOA 1 First thoughts for KM3Net on-shore data storage and distribution Facilities VLV.
MONARC Simulation Framework Corina Stratan, Ciprian Dobre UPB Iosif Legrand, Harvey Newman CALTECH.
Parallel Programming on the SGI Origin2000 With thanks to Moshe Goldberg, TCC and Igor Zacharov SGI Taub Computer Center Technion Mar 2005 Anne Weill-Zrahia.
October 2003 Iosif Legrand Iosif Legrand California Institute of Technology.
The new The new MONARC Simulation Framework Iosif Legrand  California Institute of Technology.
CERN/IT/DB Multi-PB Distributed Databases Jamie Shiers IT Division, DB Group, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland February 2001.
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.
LOGO Scheduling system for distributed MPD data processing Gertsenberger K. V. Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna.
Computing and LHCb Raja Nandakumar. The LHCb experiment  Universe is made of matter  Still not clear why  Andrei Sakharov’s theory of cp-violation.
◦ What is an Operating System? What is an Operating System? ◦ Operating System Objectives Operating System Objectives ◦ Services Provided by the Operating.
July, 2000.Simulation of distributed computing systems I.C. Legrand1 MONARC Models Of Networked Analysis at Regional Centers Iosif C. Legrand (CALTECH)
November 7, 2001Dutch Datagrid SARA 1 DØ Monte Carlo Challenge A HEP Application.
D0 SAM – status and needs Plagarized from: D0 Experiment SAM Project Fermilab Computing Division.
Ramiro Voicu December Design Considerations  Act as a true dynamic service and provide the necessary functionally to be used by any other services.
Finnish DataGrid meeting, CSC, Otaniemi, V. Karimäki (HIP) DataGrid meeting, CSC V. Karimäki (HIP) V. Karimäki (HIP) Otaniemi, 28 August, 2000.
ALICE Upgrade for Run3: Computing HL-LHC Trigger, Online and Offline Computing Working Group Topical Workshop Sep 5 th 2014.
Frontiers in Massive Data Analysis Chapter 3.  Difficult to include data from multiple sources  Each organization develops a unique way of representing.
Introduction to dCache Zhenping (Jane) Liu ATLAS Computing Facility, Physics Department Brookhaven National Lab 09/12 – 09/13, 2005 USATLAS Tier-1 & Tier-2.
4 - 1 Copyright © 2006, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Computer Software Chapter 4.
October, 2000.A Self Organsing NN for Job Scheduling in Distributed Systems I.C. Legrand1 Iosif C. Legrand CALTECH.
Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D. Computer Science The College of Saint Rose CIS 432.
EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST HEP Use Cases for Grid Computing J. A. Templon Undecided (NIKHEF) Grid Tutorial,
Grid Glasgow Outline LHC Computing at a Glance Glasgow Starting Point LHC Computing Challenge CPU Intensive Applications Timeline ScotGRID.
The Replica Location Service The Globus Project™ And The DataGrid Project Copyright (c) 2002 University of Chicago and The University of Southern California.
V.A. Ilyin,, RIGF, 14 May 2010 Internet and Science: LHC view V.A. Ilyin SINP MSU, e-ARENA.
Eine Einführung ins Grid Andreas Gellrich IT Training DESY Hamburg
High Energy Physics and Grids at UF (Dec. 13, 2002)Paul Avery1 University of Florida High Energy Physics.
CERN – IT Department CH-1211 Genève 23 Switzerland t Working with Large Data Sets Tim Smith CERN/IT Open Access and Research Data Session.
WLCG and the India-CERN Collaboration David Collados CERN - Information technology 27 February 2014.
Simics: A Full System Simulation Platform Synopsis by Jen Miller 19 March 2004.
6/23/2005 R. GARDNER OSG Baseline Services 1 OSG Baseline Services In my talk I’d like to discuss two questions:  What capabilities are we aiming for.
26 Nov 1999 F Harris LHCb computing workshop1 Development of LHCb Computing Model F Harris Overview of proposed workplan to produce ‘baseline computing.
Grid Glasgow Outline LHC Computing at a Glance Glasgow Starting Point LHC Computing Challenge CPU Intensive Applications Timeline ScotGRID.
HIGUCHI Takeo Department of Physics, Faulty of Science, University of Tokyo Representing dBASF Development Team BELLE/CHEP20001 Distributed BELLE Analysis.
Copyright © 2006, GemStone Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved. Increasing computation throughput with Grid Data Caching Jags Ramnarayan Chief Architect GemStone.
Computer Simulation of Networks ECE/CSC 777: Telecommunications Network Design Fall, 2013, Rudra Dutta.
Online Monitoring System at KLOE Alessandra Doria INFN - Napoli for the KLOE collaboration CHEP 2000 Padova, 7-11 February 2000 NAPOLI.
Computing Issues for the ATLAS SWT2. What is SWT2? SWT2 is the U.S. ATLAS Southwestern Tier 2 Consortium UTA is lead institution, along with University.
1 Farm Issues L1&HLT Implementation Review Niko Neufeld, CERN-EP Tuesday, April 29 th.
June 22, 1999MONARC Simulation System I.C. Legrand1 MONARC Models Of Networked Analysis at Regional Centres Distributed System Simulation Iosif C. Legrand.
January 20, 2000K. Sliwa/ Tufts University DOE/NSF ATLAS Review 1 SIMULATION OF DAILY ACTIVITITIES AT REGIONAL CENTERS MONARC Collaboration Alexander Nazarenko.
Latest Improvements in the PROOF system Bleeding Edge Physics with Bleeding Edge Computing Fons Rademakers, Gerri Ganis, Jan Iwaszkiewicz CERN.
Latest Improvements in the PROOF system Bleeding Edge Physics with Bleeding Edge Computing Fons Rademakers, Gerri Ganis, Jan Iwaszkiewicz CERN.
BNL dCache Status and Plan CHEP07: September 2-7, 2007 Zhenping (Jane) Liu for the BNL RACF Storage Group.
Grid Activities in CMS Asad Samar (Caltech) PPDG meeting, Argonne July 13-14, 2000.
Storage Management on the Grid Alasdair Earl University of Edinburgh.
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research Synthesis of the simulation and monitoring processes for the data storage and big data processing development in physical.
Meeting with University of Malta| CERN, May 18, 2015 | Predrag Buncic ALICE Computing in Run 2+ P. Buncic 1.
Online Software November 10, 2009 Infrastructure Overview Luciano Orsini, Roland Moser Invited Talk at SuperB ETD-Online Status Review.
CrossGrid Workshop, Kraków, 5 – 6 Nov-2001 Distributed Data Analysis in HEP Piotr MALECKI Institute of Nuclear Physics Kawiory 26A, Kraków, Poland.
] Open Science Grid Ben Clifford University of Chicago
Applied Operating System Concepts
Database Replication and Monitoring
Database Architectures and the Web
California Institute of Technology
CMS High Level Trigger Configuration Management
Controlling a large CPU farm using industrial tools
RT2003, Montreal Niko Neufeld, CERN-EP & Univ. de Lausanne
Ákos Frohner EGEE'08 September 2008
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley Chapter 2 Database System Concepts and Architecture.
CS258 Spring 2002 Mark Whitney and Yitao Duan
Development of LHCb Computing Model F Harris
An Interactive Browser For BaBar Databases
Presentation transcript:

POLITEHNICA University of Bucharest California Institute of Technology National Center for Information Technology Ciprian Mihai Dobre Corina Stratan MONARC 2 - distributed systems simulation -

The Goals of the Project To perform realistic simulation and modelling of large scale distributed computing systems, customised for specific large scale HEP applications. To provide a design framework to evaluate the performance of a range of possible computer systems, as measured by their ability to provide the physicists with the requested data in the required time, and to optimise the cost. To narrow down a region in this parameter space in which viable models can be chosen by any of the future LHC-era experiments. To offer a dynamic and flexible simulation environment.

online system multi-level trigger filter out background reduce data volume level 1 - special hardware 40 MHz (40 TB/sec) level 2 - embedded processors level 3 - PCs 75 KHz (75 GB/sec) 5 KHz (5 GB/sec) 100 Hz ( MB/sec) data processing offline analysis, selection One of the four LHC detectors (CMS) Raw recording rate 0.1 – 1 GB/sec PetaBytes / year LHC Computing: Different from Previous Experiment Generations

Geographical dispersion: of people and resources Complexity: the detector and the LHC environment; Scale: ~100 times more processing power; Petabytes per year of data 1800 Physicists 150 Institutes 32 Countries VERY LARGE SCALE DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM AND IT HAS TO PROVIDE (NEAR) REAL-TIME DATA ACCESS FOR ALL THE PARTICIPANTS CMS Off-Line LHC Computing Data Analysis

Tier2 Center Online System Offline Farm, CERN Computer France Center FNAL Center Italy Center UK Center Institute Institute ~0.25TIPS Workstations 100–1000 MBytes/sec ~2.4 Gbits/sec Mbits/sec Bunch crossing per 25 nsecs. Event is ~1 MByte in size Physicists work on analysis “channels”. Processing power: ~200,000 of today’s fastest PCs Physics data cache ~PBytes/sec ~ Gbits/sec Tier2 Center ~622 Mbits/sec Tier 0 +1 Tier 1 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier2 Center Tier 2 Experiment Regional Center Hierarchy (Worldwide Data Grid)

 The simulation model:  abstracts the components of the real system and their interactions  must be equivalent to the simulated system  Simulation models:  continuous time - the system is described by a set of differential equations  discrete time - the state changes only at certain time moments  In MONARC: one of the discrete time models (Discrete Event Simulation – DES); the events represent important activities from the system, managed with the aid of an internal clock Simulation Models

A Global View for Modelling Simulation Engine Basic Components Specific Components Computing Models LAN WAN DBCPU Scheduler Job Catalog Analysis Distributed Scheduler MetaData Jobs MONITORING REAL Systems Testbeds

Regional Center Model Job Activity Job Scheduler AJob CPU... Link Port AJob CPU... Link Port AJob CPU... Link Port DB Index DB Server Link Port DB Server Link Port FARM REGIONAL CENTER LAN WAN

The Simulation Engine  Provides the multithreading mechanism for the simulation  The entities with time dependent behavior are mapped on “active objects”  In the simulation engine: management of active objects and events  Thread reusability (thread pool) Scheduler Task Event EventQueue WorkerThread Pool Activity JobScheduler Farm CPUUnit AJob Job Engine

Multitasking Processing Model Concurrent running tasks share resources (CPU, memory, I/O) “ Interrupt” driven scheme: For each new task or when one task is finished, an interrupt is generated and all “processing times” are recomputed. It provides: Handling of concurrent jobs with different priorities. An efficient mechanism to simulate multitask processing. An easy way to apply different load balancing schemes.

Engine tests Processing a TOTAL of simple jobs in 1, 10, 100, 1000, 2 000, 4 000, CPUs (number of CPUs = number of parallel threads): more tests:

Job Scheduling  Dynamically loadable modules for each regional center  Basic job scheduler: assigns the jobs to CPUs from the local farm  More complex schedulers: allow job migration between regional centers CPU FARM JobScheduler Site A Dynamically loadable module

Centralized Scheduling CPU FARM JobScheduler Site A CPU FARM JobScheduler Site B GLOBAL Job Scheduler

Distributed Scheduling – market model – CPU FARM JobScheduler Site A CPU FARM JobScheduler Site B CPU FARM JobScheduler Site A Request COST DECISION

Example: simple distributed scheduling  Very simple scheduling algorithm, based on searching the center with the minimum load  We simulated the activity of 4 regional centers  When all the centers are heavily loaded, the number of job transfers grows unnecessarily

Network Model WA N LAN LinkPort Farm Simulated local traffic Simulated inter-regional traffic Simulated network components

Node Link Node LAN Node Link Node LAN Node Link Node LAN Internet Connections ROUTER “Interrupt” driven simulation : for each new message an interrupt is created and for all the active transfers the speed and the estimated time to complete the transfer are recalculated. Continuous Flow between events ! An efficient and realistic way to simulate concurrent transfers having different sizes / protocols. LAN/WAN Simulation Model

Network Model Network Access Layer Internet Layer Transport Layer Application Layer Message LinkPort, LAN, WAN Protocol: TCPProtocol UDPProtocol Network Job The TCP/IP layers are closely followed

Data Model Client Database Index LinkPort Database DContainer Database ServerMass Storage Mapare TaskDatabase Entity

Data Model Generic Data Container  Size  Event Type  Event Range  Access Count  INSTANCE FTP Server Node DB ServerNFS Server FILEData Base Custom Data Server Network FILE META DATA Catalog Replication Catalog Export / Import

Data Model Data Container JOB META DATA Catalog Replication Catalog Data Request Data Container List Of IO Transactions Data Processing JOB Select from the options

Activities: Arrival Patterns A flexible mechanism to define the Stochastic process of how users perform data processing tasks Dynamic loading of “Activity” tasks, which are threaded objects and are controlled by the simulation scheduling mechanism Physics Activities Injecting “Jobs” Each “Activity” thread generates data processing jobs for( int k =0; k< jobs_per_group; k++) { Job job = new Job( this, Job.ANALYSIS, "TAG”, 1, events_to_process); farm.addJob(job ); // submit the job sim_hold ( 1000 ); // wait 1000 s } Regional Centre Farm Job Activity Job Activity These dynamic objects are used to model the users behavior

Output of the simulation Simulation Engine Node DB Router User C Output Listener Filters Output Listener Filters Log Files EXCEL GRAPHICS Any component in the system can generate generic results objects Any client can subscribe with a filter and will receive the results it is Interested in. VERY SIMILAR structure as in MonALISA. We will integrate soon The output of the simulation framework into MonaLISA

Conclusions  Modelling and understanding current systems, their performance and limitations, is essential for the design of the large scale distributed processing systems. This will require continuous iterations between modelling and monitoring  Simulation and Modelling tools must provide the functionality to help in designing complex systems and evaluate different strategies and algorithms for the decision making units and the data flow management.  For future development: efficient distributed scheduling algorithms, data replication, more complex examples.