Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh P. Clark, M. Doidge, M. P. Hellmich, S. Skipsey and I. Vukotic 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DPM Monitoring Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh, Apr-101Wahid Bhimji – Files access.
Advertisements

Storage Workshop Summary Wahid Bhimji University Of Edinburgh On behalf all of the participants…
1 User Analysis Workgroup Update  All four experiments gave input by mid December  ALICE by document and links  Very independent.
Storage: Futures Flavia Donno CERN/IT WLCG Grid Deployment Board, CERN 8 October 2008.
Wahid Bhimji Andy Washbrook And others including ECDF systems team Not a comprehensive update but what ever occurred to me yesterday.
S. Gadomski, "ATLAS computing in Geneva", journee de reflexion, 14 Sept ATLAS computing in Geneva Szymon Gadomski description of the hardware the.
Background Info The UK Mirror Service provides mirror copies of data and programs from many sources all over the world. This enables users in the UK to.
Experiment Support Introduction to HammerCloud for The LHCb Experiment Dan van der Ster CERN IT Experiment Support 3 June 2010.
DPM Italian sites and EPEL testbed in Italy Alessandro De Salvo (INFN, Roma1), Alessandra Doria (INFN, Napoli), Elisabetta Vilucchi (INFN, Laboratori Nazionali.
LHC Experiment Dashboard Main areas covered by the Experiment Dashboard: Data processing monitoring (job monitoring) Data transfer monitoring Site/service.
Filesytems and file access Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh, Sam Skipsey, Chris Walker …. Apr-101Wahid Bhimji – Files access.
Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh J. Cranshaw, P. van Gemmeren, D. Malon, R. D. Schaffer, and I. Vukotic On behalf of the ATLAS collaboration CHEP 2012.
SEDA: An Architecture for Well-Conditioned, Scalable Internet Services
M i SMob i S Mob i Store - Mobile i nternet File Storage Platform Chetna Kaur.
StoRM Some basics and a comparison with DPM Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh GridPP Storage Workshop 31-Mar-101Wahid Bhimji – StoRM.
Take on messages from Lecture 1 LHC Computing has been well sized to handle the production and analysis needs of LHC (very high data rates and throughputs)
PhysX CoE: LHC Data-intensive workflows and data- management Wahid Bhimji, Pete Clarke, Andrew Washbrook – Edinburgh And other CoE WP4 people…
Storage Wahid Bhimji DPM Collaboration : Tasks. Xrootd: Status; Using for Tier2 reading from “Tier3”; Server data mining.
Module 11: Implementing ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition.
Your university or experiment logo here Caitriana Nicholson University of Glasgow Dynamic Data Replication in LCG 2008.
Introduction to dCache Zhenping (Jane) Liu ATLAS Computing Facility, Physics Department Brookhaven National Lab 09/12 – 09/13, 2005 USATLAS Tier-1 & Tier-2.
Grid Lab About the need of 3 Tier storage 5/22/121CHEP 2012, The need of 3 Tier storage Dmitri Ozerov Patrick Fuhrmann CHEP 2012, NYC, May 22, 2012 Grid.
Analysis of the ROOT Persistence I/O Memory Footprint in LHCb Ivan Valenčík Supervisor Markus Frank 19 th September 2012.
Your university or experiment logo here Storage and Data Management - Background Jens Jensen, STFC.
Wahid, Sam, Alastair. Now installed on production storage Edinburgh: srm.glite.ecdf.ed.ac.uk  Local and global redir work (port open) e.g. root://srm.glite.ecdf.ed.ac.uk//atlas/dq2/mc12_8TeV/NTUP_SMWZ/e1242_a159_a165_r3549_p1067/mc1.
And Tier 3 monitoring Tier 3 Ivan Kadochnikov LIT JINR
LCG Phase 2 Planning Meeting - Friday July 30th, 2004 Jean-Yves Nief CC-IN2P3, Lyon An example of a data access model in a Tier 1.
Architecture and ATLAS Western Tier 2 Wei Yang ATLAS Western Tier 2 User Forum meeting SLAC April
RAL Site Report Castor Face-to-Face meeting September 2014 Rob Appleyard, Shaun de Witt, Juan Sierra.
Optimisation of Grid Enabled Storage at Small Sites Jamie K. Ferguson University of Glasgow – Jamie K. Ferguson – University.
OSG Tier 3 support Marco Mambelli - OSG Tier 3 Dan Fraser - OSG Tier 3 liaison Tanya Levshina - OSG.
Light weight Disk Pool Manager experience and future plans Jean-Philippe Baud, IT-GD, CERN September 2005.
CHEP 2013, Amsterdam Reading ROOT files in a browser ROOT I/O IN JAVASCRIPT B. Bellenot, CERN, PH-SFT B. Linev, GSI, CS-EE.
1 User Analysis Workgroup Discussion  Understand and document analysis models  Best in a way that allows to compare them easily.
11 CLUSTERING AND AVAILABILITY Chapter 11. Chapter 11: CLUSTERING AND AVAILABILITY2 OVERVIEW  Describe the clustering capabilities of Microsoft Windows.
Storage Federations and FAX (the ATLAS Federation) Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh.
Your university or experiment logo here The Protocol Zoo A Site Presepective Shaun de Witt, STFC (RAL)
SLACFederated Storage Workshop Summary For pre-GDB (Data Access) Meeting 5/13/14 Andrew Hanushevsky SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory.
Grid Technology CERN IT Department CH-1211 Geneva 23 Switzerland t DBCF GT DPM / LFC and FTS news Ricardo Rocha ( on behalf of the IT/GT/DMS.
2012 Objectives for CernVM. PH/SFT Technical Group Meeting CernVM/Subprojects The R&D phase of the project has finished and we continue to work as part.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE ARDA Experiment Dashboard Ricardo Rocha (ARDA – CERN) on behalf of the Dashboard Team.
XROOTD AND FEDERATED STORAGE MONITORING CURRENT STATUS AND ISSUES A.Petrosyan, D.Oleynik, J.Andreeva Creating federated data stores for the LHC CC-IN2P3,
PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS WORKFLOW ISSUES US ATLAS Distributed Facility Workshop November 2012, Santa Cruz.
Performance Testing Test Complete. Performance testing and its sub categories Performance testing is performed, to determine how fast some aspect of a.
Grid Technology CERN IT Department CH-1211 Geneva 23 Switzerland t DBCF GT Upcoming Features and Roadmap Ricardo Rocha ( on behalf of the.
Andrea Manzi CERN On behalf of the DPM team HEPiX Fall 2014 Workshop DPM performance tuning hints for HTTP/WebDAV and Xrootd 1 16/10/2014.
EGI-InSPIRE RI EGI-InSPIRE EGI-InSPIRE RI Monitoring of the LHC Computing Activities Key Results from the Services.
T3g software services Outline of the T3g Components R. Yoshida (ANL)
Testing Infrastructure Wahid Bhimji Sam Skipsey Intro: what to test Existing testing frameworks A proposal.
BNL dCache Status and Plan CHEP07: September 2-7, 2007 Zhenping (Jane) Liu for the BNL RACF Storage Group.
EGI-InSPIRE RI EGI-InSPIRE EGI-InSPIRE RI Mario Reale – GARR NetJobs: Network Monitoring Using Grid Jobs.
J Jensen/J Gordon RAL Storage Storage at RAL Service Challenge Meeting 27 Jan 2005.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE File Transfer Software and Service SC3 Gavin McCance – JRA1 Data Management Cluster Service.
An Analysis of Data Access Methods within WLCG Shaun de Witt, Andrew Lahiff (STFC)
 IO performance of ATLAS data formats Ilija Vukotic for ATLAS collaboration CHEP October 2010 Taipei.
New Features of Xrootd SE Wei Yang US ATLAS Tier 2/Tier 3 meeting, University of Texas, Arlington,
STORAGE EXPERIENCES AT MWT2 (US ATLAS MIDWEST TIER2 CENTER) Aaron van Meerten University of Chicago Sarah Williams Indiana University OSG Storage Forum,
DPM in FAX (ATLAS Federation) Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh As well as others in the UK, IT and Elsewhere.
EMI is partially funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement RI Future Proof Storage with DPM Oliver Keeble (on behalf of the CERN IT-GT-DMS.
Daniele Bonacorsi Andrea Sciabà
Jean-Philippe Baud, IT-GD, CERN November 2007
Atlas IO improvements and Future prospects
Experience of Lustre at QMUL
Diskpool and cloud storage benchmarks used in IT-DSS
Storage Interfaces and Access: Introduction
StoRM Architecture and Daemons
Experience of Lustre at a Tier-2 site
GFAL 2.0 Devresse Adrien CERN lcgutil team
Ákos Frohner EGEE'08 September 2008
Moodle Scalability What is Scalability?
Presentation transcript:

Wahid Bhimji University of Edinburgh P. Clark, M. Doidge, M. P. Hellmich, S. Skipsey and I. Vukotic 1

 LHC experiments now have multi- petabytes of storage at multiple sites  A lot of activity at sites is I/O heavy 2

WLCG Storage Technical Evolution Group recently recommended: I/O benchmarks be developed, Experiments communicate I/O requirements, Applications and storage systems provide tools for understanding I/O. 3 This talk :  Perspectives on analyzing I/O usage  Using examples of work undertaken  With some results too!  Comparing and contrasting the approaches This talk :  Perspectives on analyzing I/O usage  Using examples of work undertaken  With some results too!  Comparing and contrasting the approaches

Sites:  Vendor supplied storage / purchasing decisions  Site tuning (hardware/ middleware) Storage Middleware Developers  Tuning system for use in WLCG environment Basic functionality testing for new releases Scale testing of low-level operations  Choice of protocols / technologies etc. Experiments  Applications  Data models / file structure  Chasing sites to ensure resources utilized 4

 Vendor storage testing: evaluating suitability of suggested storage for a Tier 2 site.  Low-level middleware testing: to improve scalability for use in bigger sites.  ROOT I/O testing framework: for evaluating changes in ROOT-based applications and data structures.  Middleware testing framework: for releases and new features. 5

AIM: Test disk server from DellDell 2 Dell R710, each with 4 x 24 TB MD3200/1200 storage arrays Dense storage of the kind in use at many sites  Sent to many sites with different storage systems We used as a DPM disk pool (most popular SE at UK Tier 2s) Servers partitioned into virtual disks 9-41TB :  Range of RAID configurations and underlying filesystems Tested in Lancaster’s smaller production cluster (512 cores)  Tests (wrapped in scripts to submit to batch queue) Rfcp: copy using rfio: 250 clients per disk server. ROOT RFIO read: 2G file, 100 clients per filesystem  Dell Whitepaper – including source code for tests: 6

Artificially created load seen on T2 production systems and similar tuning effects e.g. readaheads: so effective test for new hardware 7 blockdev --setra 8MB Block device (rfcp tests) Rfio (ROOT direct read test)

AIM: Find limits of the DPM storage element’s internal ways of dealing with requests when stressed in a realistic fashion  Added tests to DPM package perfsuiteperfsuite File copy and ROOT direct RFIO access (as before) But also a “pretend” rfcp test  All DPM calls performed but no actual transfer  Explore DPM limits without hitting hardware bottlenecks  Also added detailed log-file parsing  Full details see: ∼ wbhimji/GridStorage/StressTestingAndDevel opingDistributedDataStorage-MH.pdf 8

Found improvements to DPM daemon:  Increase socket queue  Increasing number of (slow) threads: 9 20 slow threads 70 threads DPM Functions Duration (s) See also more recent stuff from Martin Hellmich on the DPM posterthe DPM poster

10 AIM: Rapidly test ROOT I/O developments in real production environments and monitor ATLAS SW I/O.  Using hammercloud (HC):hammercloud Automatically submits functional or stress tests to a site. Already of course a powerful tool for I/O testing used for site tuning; experiment blacklisting and middleware development Modified HC to:  Take our tests from SVN.  Use identical data files: new versions pushed to sites.  Heavily instrument tests. Upload stats to an oracle db ROOT (e.g. reads; bytes); WN (traffic; load; cpu type); Storage type, access protocol etc.  New web page for monitoring.

11 Hammercloud Oracle Db SVN Define Code; Release; Dataset;… SVN Define Code; Release; Dataset;… Uploads stats Regularly submitting single tests Sites (T1s and large T2s) Sites (T1s and large T2s) Data mining tools Command line, Web interface, ROOT scripts Data mining tools Command line, Web interface, ROOT scripts ROOT source (via curl) dataset Extremely fast feedback: a.m.: New feature to test p.m: Answers from various storage systems in the world.

 ROOT based reading of file with a simple TTree: Provides metrics from ROOT (no. of reads/ read speed) Like a user analysis Reading all branches and 100% or 10% events (at random); Reading limited 2% branches (those used in a real analysis)  Using different ROOT versions Including option of trunk of ROOT for feature testing  ATLAS Specific Tests: E.g Ntuple making in framework  Instrumented user code examples  Wide-Area-Network Tests 12

13 Reading all branches TTreeCache (TTC) (30MB) Reading only 2% of branches: 300 MB TTC or 30 MB TTC Drop in cpu eff for limited braches except for some sites with vector read (dCap; xrootd) Lots more data to mine! Tree with simple objects; ~ 12k events; 6k branches; 800M total size

 Within ROOT I/O working group  Test and develop core ROOT I/O: Basket Optimisation Asynchronous Prefetching  Broaden tests: More generic benchmark and /or Real examples from other HEP experiments:  Happy to take examples to test…  Use for site tuning: As requested… Need to compare to storage client/server monitoring. E.g. xrootd (see poster of Matevz Tadel) and http.Matevz Tadel 14

15  AIM: Make sure DPM releases work in the production environment. Test new features  HC + SVN + custom stats uploaded to a new DB  Similar tests as ROOT f/w but now evaluate Current functionality:  rfio read and copy; gsiftp copy New features / protocols:  WebDav: implemented;  NFS4.1, xrootd (inc redirection): to come  Point at test DPMs: Currently Glasgow (SL5) and Edinburgh (SL6); other sites interested Auto yum update from epel-testing repo  Webpage for test results (as well as nagios)

16 SVN Define Code; Release Dataset SVN Define Code; Release Dataset Hammercloud Oracle Db Uploads stats Sites interested In testing Sites interested In testing Data mining tools Command line, Web interface, Root scripts Data mining tools Command line, Web interface, Root scripts DPM Developer DPM Developer Test DPMs Test DPMs epel-testing YUM auto- update Test DPMs Test DPMs Test DPMs Test DPMs nagios dataset ROOT source (via curl)

17

Events WebDav Direct reading in ROOT Using https (for x509 authentication) Currently very slow but under active development (e.g. to enable redirect to plain http) Offers promise and important to provide feedback from production Wall Time (s)

19

Realism:  Experiment can run its own s/w and want to: so need a “real” test.  Site and developer may not: but need a “realistic” test.  Vendor can’t run experiment code: need a synthetic benchmark. Instrumentation:  Site measurements of hardware performance.  Middleware measurements of system internals.  Experiment measurements of application. Automation:  Needed if system is to provide monitoring Scale:  Monitoring only requires single test at a time.  Other testing: learn from both though contention only at scale. Production:  Site / Vendor / Developer may want to test outside production env.  Specific examples like that here are easy.  Generic hammercloud-in-a-box: requires experiment; m/ware tweaks 20

ExampleVendor Storage Low-level Middleware Middleware framework ROOT I/O Framework UseVendor Kit/ Site Tuning Middleware Scale tests M/ware Functio n M/ware Features Protocol s Site quality level VO soft / data Automation ✖✖✔✖✔✔ ScaleStress SingleBoth EnvironmentTest Production Instrumentatio n HardwareMiddlewareApplication Realism ✖✖✔✔✔✔✔ 21 Some reuse of tests but a lot of differences too

 I/O testing is important from a variety of perspectives.  We have built tests for many of these Used for vendor solutions; site tuning; middleware and application development.  Much can be reused from these examples But need for customizations remain.  Working towards making it more generic Towards meeting goals outlined in WLCG TEG 22