Support for ”interactive batch”

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MicroKernel Pattern Presented by Sahibzada Sami ud din Kashif Khurshid.
Advertisements

Tableau Software Australia
Status GridKa & ALICE T2 in Germany Kilian Schwarz GSI Darmstadt.
23/04/2008VLVnT08, Toulon, FR, April 2008, M. Stavrianakou, NESTOR-NOA 1 First thoughts for KM3Net on-shore data storage and distribution Facilities VLV.
City University London
June 21, PROOF - Parallel ROOT Facility Maarten Ballintijn, Rene Brun, Fons Rademakers, Gunter Roland Bring the KB to the PB.
The new The new MONARC Simulation Framework Iosif Legrand  California Institute of Technology.
Statistics of CAF usage, Interaction with the GRID Marco MEONI CERN - Offline Week –
1 Status of the ALICE CERN Analysis Facility Marco MEONI – CERN/ALICE Jan Fiete GROSSE-OETRINGHAUS - CERN /ALICE CHEP Prague.
PROOF: the Parallel ROOT Facility Scheduling and Load-balancing ACAT 2007 Jan Iwaszkiewicz ¹ ² Gerardo Ganis ¹ Fons Rademakers ¹ ¹ CERN PH/SFT ² University.
Computer System Architectures Computer System Software
 What is an operating system? What is an operating system?  Where does the OS fit in? Where does the OS fit in?  Services provided by an OS Services.
Tools and Utilities for parallel and serial codes in ENEA-GRID environment CRESCO Project: Salvatore Raia SubProject I.2 C.R. ENEA-Portici. 11/12/2007.
Interactive Data Analysis with PROOF Bleeding Edge Physics with Bleeding Edge Computing Fons Rademakers CERN.
SUMA: A Scientific Metacomputer Cardinale, Yudith Figueira, Carlos Hernández, Emilio Baquero, Eduardo Berbín, Luis Bouza, Roberto Gamess, Eric García,
Unit – I CLIENT / SERVER ARCHITECTURE. Unit Structure  Evolution of Client/Server Architecture  Client/Server Model  Characteristics of Client/Server.
Introduction to dCache Zhenping (Jane) Liu ATLAS Computing Facility, Physics Department Brookhaven National Lab 09/12 – 09/13, 2005 USATLAS Tier-1 & Tier-2.
1 Marek BiskupACAT2005PROO F Parallel Interactive and Batch HEP-Data Analysis with PROOF Maarten Ballintijn*, Marek Biskup**, Rene Brun**, Philippe Canal***,
LOGO PROOF system for parallel MPD event processing Gertsenberger K. V. Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna.
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.
Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D. Computer Science The College of Saint Rose CIS 432.
NA-MIC National Alliance for Medical Image Computing UCSD: Engineering Core 2 Portal and Grid Infrastructure.
ROOT and Federated Data Stores What Features We Would Like Fons Rademakers CERN CC-IN2P3, Nov, 2011, Lyon, France.
What is SAM-Grid? Job Handling Data Handling Monitoring and Information.
1 PROOF The Parallel ROOT Facility Gerardo Ganis / CERN CHEP06, Computing in High Energy Physics 13 – 17 Feb 2006, Mumbai, India Bring the KB to the PB.
ROOT-CORE Team 1 PROOF xrootd Fons Rademakers Maarten Ballantjin Marek Biskup Derek Feichtinger (ARDA) Gerri Ganis Guenter Kickinger Andreas Peters (ARDA)
LOGO Development of the distributed computing system for the MPD at the NICA collider, analytical estimations Mathematical Modeling and Computational Physics.
PROOF and ALICE Analysis Facilities Arsen Hayrapetyan Yerevan Physics Institute, CERN.
March, PROOF - Parallel ROOT Facility Maarten Ballintijn Bring the KB to the PB not the PB to the KB.
Super Scaling PROOF to very large clusters Maarten Ballintijn, Kris Gulbrandsen, Gunther Roland / MIT Rene Brun, Fons Rademakers / CERN Philippe Canal.
1 Status of PROOF G. Ganis / CERN Application Area meeting, 24 May 2006.
PROOF tests at BNL Sergey Panitkin, Robert Petkus, Ofer Rind BNL May 28, 2008 Ann Arbor, MI.
PROOF Benchmark on Different Hardware Configurations 1 11/29/2007 Neng Xu, University of Wisconsin-Madison Mengmeng Chen, Annabelle Leung, Bruce Mellado,
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.
S.Linev: Go4 - J.Adamczewski, H.G.Essel, S.Linev ROOT 2005 New development in Go4.
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.
Background Computer System Architectures Computer System Software.
Sept. 2000CERN School of Computing1 PROOF and ROOT Grid Features Fons Rademakers.
The ALICE data quality monitoring Barthélémy von Haller CERN PH/AID For the ALICE Collaboration.
Meeting with University of Malta| CERN, May 18, 2015 | Predrag Buncic ALICE Computing in Run 2+ P. Buncic 1.
Claudio Grandi INFN Bologna Virtual Pools for Interactive Analysis and Software Development through an Integrated Cloud Environment Claudio Grandi (INFN.
PROOF on multi-core machines G. GANIS CERN / PH-SFT for the ROOT team Workshop on Parallelization and MultiCore technologies for LHC, CERN, April 2008.
The EPIKH Project (Exchange Programme to advance e-Infrastructure Know-How) gLite Grid Introduction Salma Saber Electronic.
CT101: Computing Systems Introduction to Operating Systems.
Lyon Analysis Facility - status & evolution - Renaud Vernet.
Netscape Application Server
Introduction to Load Balancing:
Heterogeneous Computation Team HybriLIT
Status of the CERN Analysis Facility
PROOF – Parallel ROOT Facility
BDII Performance Tests
PROOF in Atlas Tier 3 model
Bernd Panzer-Steindel, CERN/IT
Distributed object monitoring for ROOT analyses with Go4 v.3
Ruslan Fomkin and Tore Risch Uppsala DataBase Laboratory
Grid Computing.
Comments about PROOF / ROOT evolution during coming years
CRESCO Project: Salvatore Raia
Ákos Frohner EGEE'08 September 2008
G. Ganis, 2nd LCG-France Colloquium
Data, Databases, and DBMSs
PROOF - Parallel ROOT Facility
Simulation in a Distributed Computing Environment
Hybrid Programming with OpenMP and MPI
AIMS Equipment & Automation monitoring solution
Introduction to Operating Systems
The Main Features of Operating Systems
Database System Architectures
L. Glimcher, R. Jin, G. Agrawal Presented by: Leo Glimcher
Presentation transcript:

Support for ”interactive batch” B. Bellenot, R. Brun, G. Ganis, J. Iwaszkiewicz, F. Rademakers, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, M. Ballintijn, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA PROOF Multi-tier architecture PROOF enables interactive analysis with ROOT [1] on distributed computing resources. It realizes basic parallelism by exploiting the independence of uncorrelated events. PROOF is designed for use at Central Analysis Facilities Departmental workgroup computing facilities (Tier-2’s) Multi-core, multi-disks desktops Transparency: distributed system perceived as an extension of the local ROOT session (same: syntax, scripts, …) Scalability: efficient use of the available resources: performance scales with the number of CPUs and disks. Adaptability: adapt to heterogeneous resources sub master workers MSS geographical domain top client list of output objects (histograms, …) commands, scripts PROOF enabled facility Design goals Package manager - Handling of additional libraries, classes, data files, etc. Support for dynamic environment setting - On-the-fly definition of variables and/or sourcing of relevant scripts Query manager for easy handling of results - Results can be saved on any mass storage Support for ”interactive batch” - Smooth interactive -> batch transition - Client disconnection / reconnection - Users can reconnect later from a different place to e.g. check a long-query status and retrieve the results - Background, non-blocking running model - Multiple-session control from single ROOT shell - Concurrent execution of queries on different sessions Dataset manager and uploader - Handling of meta information about data sets - Browsing functionality Real-time feedback - Snapshots of selected objects received at tunable frequency User runs in a unique sandbox - Flexible authentication framework (password, Krb5, GSI) Features Connection lay-out set up via dedicated daemons in charge of authenticating the clients and spawning the server applications. XROOTD [2] has been instrumented for this purpose. Work distribution and Data Access Strategies Low-latency access to data is crucial Optimizing to process data in it’s current location Using caching and pre-fetching techniques for data from mass storages Dynamic load balancing: pull architecture Workers ask for more work when they are ready Packet generation (packetizer): Adaptive mechanism to avoid node overloading Packet size calculation based on a fixed time quantum Resource Scheduling To face the needs of large, multi-user analysis environments expected in the LHC era, optimized sharing of resources among users is required. The resource scheduling improves the system utilization, insures efficient operation with any number of users and realizes the experiment’s scheduling policy. To achieve the goal, two levels of resource scheduling are introduced: At worker level, a dedicated mechanism controls the fraction of resources used by each query, according to the user priority and current load. At master level, a new central component, the scheduler, decides which resources can be used by a given query, based on the overall status of the cluster, the query requirements (data location, estimated time for completion, …), the client history, etc. Scalability Processing rate Number of workers ALICE and PROOF Central Analysis Facility (CAF) 34 Xeon 2.8 GHz 4 GB RAM, GB Ethernet Data read from mass storage via XROOTD [2] Processing rate up to 700MB/s Multicore Scalability Running PROOF: ROOT shell or GUI A PROOF session is controlled by a dedicated class which can be instantiated on the ROOT shells or within ROOT-enabled applications (see the grid interface box for an example). A full-featured graphical controller is also available. Feedback histograms Predefined sessions Separate folder for each query ALICE analysis repeated ad infinitum on dual-socket machines equipped with quad-, dual- and single-core processors Speed-o-meters show the instantaneous event and MB processing rates: the advantage of having more CPU is clear The rate normalized by the clock speed and # of CPU sockets scales nearly with the # of cores, indicating that the available computing power is fully exploited Query editor Browser for datasets and analysis macros Processing and performance status [1] http://root.cern.ch [2] http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xrootd