Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment Viktor Kolosov (ITEP Moscow) Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Buffers & Spoolers J L Martin Think about it… All I/O is relatively slow. For most of us, input by typing is painfully slow. From the CPUs point.
Advertisements

Status GridKa & ALICE T2 in Germany Kilian Schwarz GSI Darmstadt.
Clara Gaspar on behalf of the LHCb Collaboration, “Physics at the LHC and Beyond”, Quy Nhon, Vietnam, August 2014 Challenges and lessons learnt LHCb Operations.
T1 at LBL/NERSC/OAK RIDGE General principles. RAW data flow T0 disk buffer DAQ & HLT CERN Tape AliEn FC Raw data Condition & Calibration & data DB disk.
CHEP 2012 – New York City 1.  LHC Delivers bunch crossing at 40MHz  LHCb reduces the rate with a two level trigger system: ◦ First Level (L0) – Hardware.
1 Databases in ALICE L.Betev LCG Database Deployment and Persistency Workshop Geneva, October 17, 2005.
The new The new MONARC Simulation Framework Iosif Legrand  California Institute of Technology.
K.Harrison CERN, 23rd October 2002 HOW TO COMMISSION A NEW CENTRE FOR LHCb PRODUCTION - Overview of LHCb distributed production system - Configuration.
Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment V.Kolosov, I.Korolko, S.Makarychev ITEP Moscow.
ITEP participation in the EGEE project NEC’2005, Varna, Bulgaria Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)
Zhiling Chen (IPP-ETHZ) Doktorandenseminar June, 4 th, 2009.
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.
Computing and LHCb Raja Nandakumar. The LHCb experiment  Universe is made of matter  Still not clear why  Andrei Sakharov’s theory of cp-violation.
Preparation of KIPT (Kharkov) computing facilities for CMS data analysis L. Levchuk Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology (KIPT), Kharkov, Ukraine.
03/27/2003CHEP20031 Remote Operation of a Monte Carlo Production Farm Using Globus Dirk Hufnagel, Teela Pulliam, Thomas Allmendinger, Klaus Honscheid (Ohio.
Computing Infrastructure Status. LHCb Computing Status LHCb LHCC mini-review, February The LHCb Computing Model: a reminder m Simulation is using.
Jean-Yves Nief CC-IN2P3, Lyon HEPiX-HEPNT, Fermilab October 22nd – 25th, 2002.
LHCb computing in Russia Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow) Russia-CERN JWGC, October 2005.
Cosener’s House – 30 th Jan’031 LHCb Progress & Plans Nick Brook University of Bristol News & User Plans Technical Progress Review of deliverables.
ATLAS DC2 seen from Prague Tier2 center - some remarks Atlas sw workshop September 2004.
Finnish DataGrid meeting, CSC, Otaniemi, V. Karimäki (HIP) DataGrid meeting, CSC V. Karimäki (HIP) V. Karimäki (HIP) Otaniemi, 28 August, 2000.
Dan Tovey, University of Sheffield GridPP: Experiment Status & User Feedback Dan Tovey University Of Sheffield.
Results of the LHCb experiment Data Challenge 2004 Joël Closier CERN / LHCb CHEP’ 04.
14 Aug 08DOE Review John Huth ATLAS Computing at Harvard John Huth.
Sejong STATUS Chang Yeong CHOI CERN, ALICE LHC Computing Grid Tier-2 Workshop in Asia, 1 th December 2006.
Status of the LHCb MC production system Andrei Tsaregorodtsev, CPPM, Marseille DataGRID France workshop, Marseille, 24 September 2002.
1 PRAGUE site report. 2 Overview Supported HEP experiments and staff Hardware on Prague farms Statistics about running LHC experiment’s DC Experience.
1 LCG-France sites contribution to the LHC activities in 2007 A.Tsaregorodtsev, CPPM, Marseille 14 January 2008, LCG-France Direction.
The LHCb CERN R. Graciani (U. de Barcelona, Spain) for the LHCb Collaboration International ICFA Workshop on Digital Divide Mexico City, October.
1 LHCb on the Grid Raja Nandakumar (with contributions from Greig Cowan) ‏ GridPP21 3 rd September 2008.
LHCb production experience with Geant4 LCG Applications Area Meeting October F.Ranjard/ CERN.
Software Overview Akiya Miyamoto KEK JSPS Tokusui Workshop December-2012 Topics MC production Computing reousces GRID Future events Topics MC production.
Integration of the ATLAS Tag Database with Data Management and Analysis Components Caitriana Nicholson University of Glasgow 3 rd September 2007 CHEP,
Status of the Bologna Computing Farm and GRID related activities Vincenzo M. Vagnoni Thursday, 7 March 2002.
23.March 2004Bernd Panzer-Steindel, CERN/IT1 LCG Workshop Computing Fabric.
13 October 2004GDB - NIKHEF M. Lokajicek1 Operational Issues in Prague Data Challenge Experience.
ITEP participation in the EGEE project NEC’2007, Varna, Bulgaria Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)
Materials for Report about Computing Jiří Chudoba x.y.2006 Institute of Physics, Prague.
LHCb report to LHCC and C-RSG Philippe Charpentier CERN on behalf of LHCb.
David Stickland CMS Core Software and Computing
OPERATIONS REPORT JUNE – SEPTEMBER 2015 Stefan Roiser CERN.
1 LHCb computing for the analysis : a naive user point of view Workshop analyse cc-in2p3 17 avril 2008 Marie-Hélène Schune, LAL-Orsay for LHCb-France Framework,
Distributed Physics Analysis Past, Present, and Future Kaushik De University of Texas at Arlington (ATLAS & D0 Collaborations) ICHEP’06, Moscow July 29,
Markus Frank (CERN) & Albert Puig (UB).  An opportunity (Motivation)  Adopted approach  Implementation specifics  Status  Conclusions 2.
ALICE Physics Data Challenge ’05 and LCG Service Challenge 3 Latchezar Betev / ALICE Geneva, 6 April 2005 LCG Storage Management Workshop.
CDF SAM Deployment Status Doug Benjamin Duke University (for the CDF Data Handling Group)
Monthly video-conference, 18/12/2003 P.Hristov1 Preparation for physics data challenge'04 P.Hristov Alice monthly off-line video-conference December 18,
LHCb Computing 2015 Q3 Report Stefan Roiser LHCC Referees Meeting 1 December 2015.
ATLAS – statements of interest (1) A degree of hierarchy between the different computing facilities, with distinct roles at each level –Event filter Online.
ALICE Computing Data Challenge VI
Ian Bird WLCG Workshop San Francisco, 8th October 2016
Overview of the Belle II computing
LHC experiments Requirements and Concepts ALICE
Data Challenge with the Grid in ATLAS
INFN-GRID Workshop Bari, October, 26, 2004
ALICE Physics Data Challenge 3
LHCb Software & Computing Status
LHCb computing in Russia
LHCb Computing Model and Data Handling Angelo Carbone 5° workshop italiano sulla fisica p-p ad LHC 31st January 2008.
Philippe Charpentier CERN – LHCb On behalf of the LHCb Computing Group
Readiness of ATLAS Computing - A personal view
Dagmar Adamova (NPI AS CR Prague/Rez) and Maarten Litmaath (CERN)
AliRoot status and PDC’04
MC data production, reconstruction and analysis - lessons from PDC’04
Simulation use cases for T2 in ALICE
Bernd Panzer-Steindel CERN/IT
R. Graciani for LHCb Mumbay, Feb 2006
Gridifying the LHCb Monte Carlo production system
Production Manager Tools (New Architecture)
The LHCb Computing Data Challenge DC06
Presentation transcript:

Large scale data flow in local and GRID environment Viktor Kolosov (ITEP Moscow) Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)

Research objectives Plans: Large scale data flow simulation in local and GRID environment. Done: Large scale data flow optimization in realistic DC environment (ALICE and LHCb) more interesting more useful (hopefully)

main components ITEP LHC computer farm (1) 64  Pentium IV PC modules ( ) A. Selivanov (ITEP-ALICE) a head of the ITEP-LHC farm

BATCH nodes ITEP LHC computer farm (2) CPU:64 PIV-2.4GHz (hyperthreading) RAM:1 GB Disks:80 GB Mass storage Disk servers:6 x 1.6 TB + 1 x 1.0 TB + 1 x 0.5 TB 100 Mbit/s CERN 2-3 Mbit/s 20 (LCG test) + 44 (DCs)

Monitoring available at ITEP LHC FARM usage in 2004 Main ITEP players in 2004 – ALICE and LHCb

ALICE DC Goals Determine readiness of the off-line framework for data processing Validate the distributed computing model PDC’2004:10% test of the final capacity PDC’04 physics: hard probes (jets, heavy flavours) & pp physics Strategy Part 1: underlying (background) events (March-July) –Distributed simulation –Data transfer to CERN Part 2: signal events & test of CERN as data source (July-November) –Distributed simulation, reconstruction, generation of ESD Part 3: distributed analysis Tools AliEn – Alice Environment for the distributed computing AliEn – LCG Interface

LHCb DC Physics Goals (170M events) 1. HLT studies 2. S/B studies, consolidate background estimates, background properties Gather information for the LHCb computing TDR ● Robustness test of the LHCb software and production system ● Test of the LHCb distributed computing model ● Incorporation of the LCG application software ● Use of LCG as a substantial fraction of the production capacity Strategy: 1.MC Production(April-September) 2.Stripping (event preselection)still going on 3.Analysis

Details 1 job – 1 event Raw event size: 2 GB ESD size: MB CPU time: 5-20 hours RAM usage: huge Store local copies Backup sent to CERN ALICE AliEn Massive data exchange with disk servers--- 1 job – 500 events Raw event size: ~1.3 MB DST size: MB CPU time: hours RAM usage: moderate Store local copies of DSTs DSTs and LOGs sent to CERN LHCb DIRAC Often communication with central services-

Optimization April – start massive LHCb DC 1 job/CPU – everything OK use hyperthreading - 2jobs/CPU - increase efficiency by 30-40% May – start massive ALICE DC bad interference with LHCb jobs often crashes of NFS restrict ALICE queue to 10 simultaneous jobs, optimize communication with disk server June – Septembersmooth running share resources, LHCb - June July,ALICE – August September careful online monitoring of jobs (on top of usual monitoring from collaboration)

Monitoring Often power cuts in summer (4-5 times)-5% all intermediate steps are lost (…) provide reserve power line and more powerful UPS Stalled jobs-10% infinite loops in GEANT4 (LHCb) crashes of central services write simple check script and kill such jobs (bug report is not sent…) Slow data transfer to CERN poor and restricted link to CERN problems with CASTOR automatic retry

ALICE Statistics

LHCb Statistics

Summary Quite visible participation in ALICE and LHCb DCs ALICE → ~5% contribution (ITEP part ~70%) LHCb → ~5% contribution (ITEP part ~70%) With only 44 CPUs Problems reported to colleagues in collaborations More attention to LCG now Distributed analysis – very different pattern of work load