1. 3D Project Status Dirk Duellmann, CERN IT For the LCG 3D project http://lcg3d.cern.chhttp://lcg3d.cern.ch Meeting with LHCC Referees, March 21st 06

2. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann2 Why a LCG Database Deployment Project? LCG today provides an infrastructure for distributed access to file based data and file replication Physics applications (and grid services) require a similar services for data stored in relational databases –Several applications and services already use RDBMS –Several sites have already experience in providing RDBMS services Goals for common project as part of LCG –increase the availability and scalability of LCG and experiment components –allow applications to access data in a consistent, location independent way –allow to connect existing db services via data replication mechanisms –simplify a shared deployment and administration of this infrastructure during 24 x 7 operation Scope set by PEB – Online - Offline - Tier sites

3. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann3 3D Participants and Responsibilities LCG 3D is a joint project between –Service users: experiments and grid s/w projects –Service providers: LCG tier sites including CERN Project itself has (as all projects) limited resources (2 FTE) –Mainly coordinating requirement discussions, testbed and production configuration, setup and support –Rely on experiments/projects to define and validate their application function and requirements –Rely on sites for local implementation and deployment of testbed and production setup

4. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann4 DB Readiness Workshop - Feb 6th http://agenda.cern.ch/fullAgenda.php?ida=a058495 Readiness of the production services at T0/T1 –status reports from tier 0 and tier 1 sites –technical problems with the proposed setup (RAC clusters)? –open questions from sites to experiments? Readiness of experiment (and grid) database applications –Application list, code release, data model and deployment schedule –Successful validation at T0 and (if required T1)? –Any new deployment problems seen by experiment users which need a service change Review site/experiment milestones from the database project plan –(Re-)align with other work plans - eg experiment challenges, SC4

5. Meeting with LHCC Referees Dirk Duellmann5 Online-Offline Connection A well-documented schema was reported at the last LCG3D Workshop Artwork by Richard Hawkings Slide : A. Vaniachine

6. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann6

7. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann7

8. Meeting with LHCC Referees Dirk Duellmann8 Offline FroNTier Resources/Deployment Tier-0: 2-3 Redundant FroNTier servers. Tier-1: 2-3 Redundant Squid servers. Tier-N: 1-2 Squid Servers. Typical Squid server requirements: –CPU/MEM/DISK/NIC=1GHz/1 GB/100GB/Gbit –Network: visible to Worker LAN (private network) and WAN (internet) –Firewall: Two Ports open for URI (FroNTier Launchpad) access and SNMP monitoring (typically 8000 and 3401 respectively) Squid non-requirements –Special hardware (although high-throughput Disk I/O is good) –Cache backup (if disk dies or is corrupted, start from scratch and reload automatically) Squid is easy to install and requires little on-going administration. Squid(s) Tomcat(s) Squid DB Squid Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier N FroNTier Launchpad http JDBC Slide : Lee Lueking

9. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann9 Experiment Architectures Commonalities & Differences Focus on common part of the experiment plans –Oracle database setup online (all), offline(all), tier 1(ATLAS/LHCb) –Mysql is also mentioned for T0 and T1: as addition, not as replacement –Distribution online-offline ATLAS, CMS, LHCb: Oracle streams Alice: collect / transfer data via Alice software –Distribution tier 0 - tier 1: ATLAS, LHCb: Oracle streams CMS: Frontier (ATLAS interested) Alice: File transfer and conditions lookup via file catalog –Tier 1 - Tier 2 ATLAS: based on MySQL/SQLight files Alice/CMS/LHCb: no tier 2 database service (apart from grid services)

10. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann10 LCG 3D Service Architecture T2 - local db cache -subset data -only local service M O O O M T1- db back bone - all data replicated - reliable service T0 - autonomous reliable service Oracle Streams http cache (SQUID) Cross DB copy & MySQL/SQLight Files O Online DB -autonomous reliable service F S S SS R/O Access at Tier 1/2 (at least initially)

11. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann11 LCG 3D Replication Testbed Since last summer - databases at ASCC, CERN, CNAF, GridKA, (FNAL), IN2P3, RAL Many replication test in progress –Offline->T1: COOL/Streams ATLAS : Stefan Stonjek (CERN, RAL, Oxford?) COOL/Streams LHCb : Marco Clemencic (CERN, RAL, GridKA?) POOL/FroNtier CMS : Lee Lueking (CERN and several t1/t2 sites) AMGA/Streams: Birger Koblitz (CERN->CERN) AMI/Streams : Solveig Albrandt (IN2P3->CERN) LFC/Streams: workplan proposed, starting with IN2P3 VOMS/Streams: workplan proposed, starting with CNAF –Online->offline: Conditions/Streams CMS : Saima Iqbal (functional testing) COOL/Streams ATLAS : (Gancho Dimitrov) Server setup, networking config with pit network LHCb : planning with LHCb online Coordination between sites/experiments during weekly 3D meetings –Status: successful functional test - ramping up volume/load –Need experiment involvement to define target scale

12. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann12 Last Year - Distribution Technology Studies & Results Frontier has been integrated into LCG software framework –POOL plug-in in used by CMS –workplan for COOL/Frontier by ATLAS (with ATLAS manpower) Frontier/POOL in 3D testbed has been successfully used by CMS from several tier 1 and tier 2 sites –Squid caches were indeed quick to setup and easy to deploy Streams functionality has been confirmed by a number tests –With COOL in ATLAS and LHCb LHCb: streams functionality shown, streams overhead can be neglected wrt to intrinsic (COOL client) performance –With POOL in CMS Calibration data written online can be streamed to offline database and can be picked up as C++ objects through POOL/ORA (direct DB connection) or POOL/Frontier (squid cached connection)

13. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann13 Distribution Technologies - Move to Production Deployment Moved on from functionality to production deployment & scalability –Finalize technology report for database service, streams and frontier Further decoupling between Tier 0 and Tier 1 sites –Streams data capture now done on a separate machine based on log files - no impact of eg WAN problems on T0 database Further decoupling among Tier 1 sites –Prototyping with Oracle decoupled queues for functional sites (changes leave CERN capture machine with little latency) and problem sites (change queue kept on disk for few days) T0 Frontier servers - high availability / scaling –3-Node production setup with DNS load balancing and client failover –Backend: of 4-node experiment database cluster

14. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann14 Building Block for Tier 0/1 - Oracle Database Clusters Two+ dual-CPU nodes Shared storage (eg FC SAN) Scale CPU and I/O ops (independently) Transparent failover and s/w patches LHC database services are deployed on RAC All 3D production sites agreed to setup a RAC cluster

15. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann15 CERN Hardware evolution for 2006 Current State ALICEATLASCMSLHCbGrid3DNon-LHCValidation - 2-node offline 2-node -- 2x2-node 2-node online test Pilot on disk server Proposed structure in Q2 2006 2-node4-node 4--node2-node2-node (PDB replacement) 2-node valid/test 2-node pilot Compass?? Online? Linear ramp-up budgeted for hardware resources in 2006-2008 Planning next major service extension for Q3 this year Slide : Maria Girone

16. Meeting with LHCC Referees Dirk Duellmann16 Frontier Production Configuration at Tier 0 Squid runs in http-accelerator mode (as a reverse proxy server) Slide : Luis Ramos

17. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann17 LCG Database Deployment Plan After October ‘05 workshop a database deployment plan has been presented to LCG GDB and MB –http://agenda.cern.ch/fullAgenda.php?ida=a057112 Two production phases April - Sept ‘06 : partial production service –Production service (parallel to existing testbed) –H/W requirements defined by experiments/projects –Based on Oracle 10gR2 –Subset of LCG tier 1 sites: ASCC, CERN, BNL, CNAF, GridKA, IN2P3, RAL October ‘06- onwards : full production service –Adjusted h/w requirements (defined at summer ‘06 workshop) –Other tier 1 sites joined in: PIC, NIKHEF, NDG, TRIUMF

18. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann18 Tier 1 Hardware Setup Propose to setup for April deployment phase –2/3 dual-cpu database nodes with 2GB or more Setup as RAC cluster (preferably) per experiment ATLAS: 3 nodes with 300GB storage (after mirroring) LHCb: 2 nodes with 100GB storage (after mirroring) Shared storage (eg FibreChannel) proposed to allow for clustering –2-3 dual-cpu Squid nodes with 1GB or more Squid s/w packaged by CMS will be provided by 3D 100GB storage per node Need to clarify service responsibility (DB or admin team?) Target s/w release: Oracle 10gR2 –RedHat Enterprise Server to insure Oracle support Production setups for Castor and Grid Services will be required in addition –Schedule setup consolidation into SC4 workplan

19. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann19 Tier 1 Progress Sites largely on schedule for a service start end of March –h/w either installed already (BNL, CNAF, IN2P3) or expect delivery of order shortly (GridKA, RAL) –Some problems with Oracle Clusters technology encountered and solved! –Active participation from sites - DBA community building up First DBA meeting focusing on RAC installation, setup and monitoring hosted by Rutherford scheduled for second half of March Need to involve remaining Tier 1 sites now! –Established contact to PIC, NIKHEF/SARA, NSG, TRIUMF to follow workshops, email and meetings Next work shop 23rd of March hosted by RAL –Focus: finalizing DB Server and monitoring setup at T0 and T1

20. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann20 Progress on Open Issues Open Issues –X.509(proxy) certificates - supported by Oracle? Investigating fallback solutions Closed –s/w and support licenses for Tier 1 Close to formal agreement –Instant client distribution within LCG Agreed with Oracle –Frontier apps server support During initial phase (March-Sept) CMS proposed to support tomcat/frontier/squid setup

21. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann21 Databases in Middleware & Castor Took place already for services used in SC3 –Existing setups and experience with SC workloads LFC, FTS - Tier 0 and above –Low volume, but high availability requirements –CERN: Run on 2-node Oracle cluster; outside single box Oracle or MySQL CASTOR 2 - CERN and some T1 sites –Need to understand scaling to LHC rates Need to consolidate middleware databases with (larger) experiment database setups

22. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann22 LCG Software Progress LCG Applications now based on CORAL –Includes re-try and failover required for reliable db service DB lookup based on XML based list of databases Prototyping integration with LFC with CAT team (India) –POOL includes production version FroNTier plug-in Concrete caching policies –S/w on schedule for 2006 deployment LCG s/w expected to be stable by end of February for distributed deployment as part of SC4 or experiment challenges Caveats: –COOL still has important functionality items on the development plan for this year –Schema changes will need careful planning for COOL and FroNTier

23. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann23 Experiment Applications Status Conditions - Driving the database service size at T0 and T1 –EventTAGs (may become significant - need replication tests and concrete experiment deployment models) Framework integration and DB workload generators exist –Functionality tested in various COOL and POOL/FroNTier tests –T0 performance and replication tests (T0->T1) look ok Conditions: Online -> Offline replication starting now –CMS and ATLAS are executing online test plans Progress in defining concrete conditions data models –CMS showed most complete picture (for Magnet Test) –Still some uncertainty about volumes, numbers of clients

24. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann24 Summary Significant progress in all areas of the project Production Schedule defined Phase 1 - end of March: ASCC, BNL, CERN, CNAF, IN2P3, RAL –Full deployment - end of September: PIC, NIKHEF, NDG, TRIUMF DB clusters deployed at Tier 0 and Tier 1 –Distribution setup common components of experiment plans –Oracle service (online/T0/T1), Streams(online/T0/T1), Frontier(T1/T2), MySQL/SQLight(T2+) Setup progressing on schedule at tier 0 and 1 sites Application moved to performance testing –First larger scale conditions replication tests with promising results for streams and frontier technologies Main risk: remaining uncertainty on conditions payload

25. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann25 Milestones / Schedules Project Milestones –3D Replication Technology Writeup - May ‘06 Test responsible (based on individual test docs) –Database Service Definition - June ‘06 Site responsible (based on LCG TDR document) –Backup/Recovery Strategy for T0 & T1 - August ‘06 –Database Lookup Service (LFC based) - August ‘06 Experiment Deployment Plans –Concrete Conditions Data Models for main detectors defined (eg the detectors accounting for 80% in volume/access) –Conditions deployed at Tier 1s –Conditions replicated between Online and Offline

26. Meeting with LHCC RefereesDirk Duellmann26 Conclusions There is little reason to believe that a distributed database service will move into stable production any quicker than any of the other grid services Should start now with larger scale production operation to resolve the unavoidable deployment issues Need the cooperation of experiments (and sites) to make sure that concrete requests can be quickly validated against the pre-production service