1. Implementation Review1 Deriving Architecture Requirements March 14, 2003

2. Implementation Review2 Architectures Homogeneous Heterogeneous Centralized computing Distributed computing Centralized storage Locally attached disks One system with many CPUs Many systems with one CPU Dynamic server Monolithic mainframe Unix Windows

3. Implementation Review3 Requirements Architecture requirements  determined by Reliability, Availability and Serviceability (RAS) requirements, programmatic goals and constraints (budget, resources), software architecture System requirements (CPU, memory, throughput, storage)  determined by performance and data volume requirements (covered in presentations after coffee break) System requirements can be met by many Architectures

4. Implementation Review4 Overview Recap requirements from Rodger’s presentation Derive the Architecture requirements Translate the Architecture requirements in to an Architecture design

5. Implementation Review5 Goal: <5% (1 day/week = 14%) RAS: Reliability Availability Serviceability Recap

6. Implementation Review6 Recap While current system runs on average! at ~50% capacity, it does not meet requirements because of system failures and inefficient use of resources AND:  Distribution volume and user demand will continue to grow 20% per year, with jump this summer (ACS)  Ingest volume will continue to grow (COS, WFC3, SM4)  Calibration algorithms increasingly powerful  Need to migrate from OpenVMS and Tru64  Need for Integration and Test (I&T) environment for realistic load testing While HST budget at STScI declining

7. Implementation Review7 Pipeline Processing Ingest Distribution DB Science Pipelines Archive User Interfaces CCS Data Receipt Engineering DADS-OPUS transfer Export Media Current Operational Architecture Archive Ingest DADS 9.* Distribution Science Pipelines OTFR Users Archive Catalog Browsing DB HST Pipeline Processing Ingest Distribution DB

8. Implementation Review8

9. 9

10. 10 Current Architecture – Issues Complex:  Three operating systems: OpenVMS, Tru64, Solaris  Many systems, disks, cross-mounts, dependencies  Hard to model, capture performance data, metrics Fragile:  Single points of failure, no redundancy  HW used in higher-failure mode (jukeboxes)  Failures are expensive because of complexity Not scaleable: – growth will increase complexity Not flexible: – cannot handle peak loads Not testable: – does not support realistic I&T environment  Low RAS  Expensive

11. Implementation Review11 Architecture Requirements Simple:  One operating system  Few systems, disks, cross-mounts, dependencies  Easy to model, capture performance data, metrics Robust:  No single points of failure: redundancy  HW use within specs  Easy to recover Scaleable: - grow without increasing complexity Flexible: - handle peak loads Testable: - provide I&T environment  High RAS  Affordable

12. Implementation Review12 Storage Requirements Storage Solution must be high RAS:  Fully redundant, mirrored  Provide business continuity features:  Live backups  Allow snapshot backups of databases  Easy to manage And:  Allow future growth within the box  Allow flexible allocation of space  Support I&T environment Within budget, time constraints Enterprise-class Storage EMC SAN

13. Implementation Review13 Computing requirements Computing solution must be high RAS  Fully redundant  Failure isolation  Easy to manage And:  Easy to model, capture performance data, metrics  Allow growth within the box  Allow flexible allocation of resources  Provide an I&T environment Within budget, time constraints Enterprise-class Server SunFire 15K

14. Implementation Review14 Computing requirements - cont. Avoid locking in Operating System versions on Server by vendor specific drivers: jukeboxes, CD/DVD/Tape writers  Do not connect peripherals directly to Server but only to stand-alone, dedicated systems Isolate the server from external users  Do not host web-interfaces (Archive, MAST) or application interfaces (StarView) directly on Server but only on stand-alone dedicated systems

15. Implementation Review15 Architecture design:

16. Implementation Review16 New Architecture SUN FIRE 15K SUN FIRE 15K Domain Config Opus/Archive 7 Dynamically Re-Configurable Domains EMC OPUS/Archive OPS EMC Databases OPS Code Development System Test Database Test OS/Security Test

17. Implementation Review17 Architecture is more than sum of the parts:  Optimal use of the EMC SAN requires a consolidated computing environment  It is the combination of the Computing and Storage solutions that ensures the high RAS architecture  The high RAS Data Processing System is sum of:  High RAS Architecture  High RAS Software Systems (other presentations)  High RAS use models (other presentations) Architecture summary:

18. Implementation Review18 Concluding remarks Showed how Rodger’s requirements and goals translated in to high RAS requirements, which determined the new Architecture design. Next presentations go into system requirements:  SunFire 15K Enterprise-Grade server  EMC Centralized Storage