1. CC-IN2P3 Tier-2s Cloud Frédérique Chollet (IN2P3-LAPP) on behalf of the LCG-France project and Tiers representatives ATLAS visit to Tier-1 Lyon, April 26-27 2007

2. 2 Contents LCG-France sites / Tiers of ATLAS ATLAS Cloud FR Activities ATLAS and Sites Discussion Thanks to Ueda, Fabio, Jean-Pierre, Eric, Stéphane

3. 3 LCG-France sites (1/3) LCG-France promotes the creation and coordinates the integration of Tier-2/Tier-3 french sites into the WLCG collaboration WLCG Tiers-2 : Analysis facility in Lyon and 3 Tiers-2  GRIF-Paris Region acting as a federation of 5 sites (DAPNIA, IPNO, LAL,LLR, LPNHE)  LPC-Clermont  Subatech-Nantes Resources outside Tier-1 : a set of 3 Tier-2s and 4 Tier-3s  10 french laboratories involved (1 more candidate : LPSC Grenoble)  Tier-2s and Tier-3s funded by universities, local/regional governments, hosting laboratories, …  Open to EGEE VOs - Collaborations established outside HEP  Tier-2 strategy : WLCG Tier-2 (+ Tier-3/EGEE outside MoU)  WLCG Tier-2 : ~ 80 % of GRIF resources  Tier-3 strategy : local analysis facility, happy to be considered as small Tier-2 (opportunistic use by experiments), open to EGEE VOs

4. 4 Scientific and Technical project leaders : CC-IN2P3, AF Lyon : F.Malek, F. Hernandez CPPM Marseille : C.Bee,T.Mouthuy GRIF Paris Region : JP. Meyer, M. Jouvin IPHC Strasbourg : D.Bloch,Y.Patois IPNL Lyon : S.Perries, D.Pugnère LAPP Annecy : S.Jézéquel, N.Neyroud LPC Clermont : D. Pallin, J.C Chevaleyre Subatech Nantes : L. Aphecetche, JM. Barbet Technical Teams G.Baulieu,JM. Barbet, C. Barbier, J.Bernier, D.Bouvet, B.Boutherin, L.Caillat, K.Chawoshi, H.Cordier, C.Diarra, S. Elles, E. Fede, Y.Giraud, P.Girard, M. Gougerot, C.Gondrand, Z. Georgette, E. Knoops, P. Micout, P. Larrieu, C. Leroy, C. L’Horphelin, L. Martin, E. Medernach, V.Mendoza, P. Mora de Fraitas, T.Ollivier, Y.Perret, G.Philippon, G. Rahal, M. Ricard, R. Rumler, F. Schaer, J. Schaeffer, L. Schwarz, I. Semeniouk, D. Terront, A. Trunov LCG-France sites (2/3)

5. 5 LCG-France sites (3/3) Supported LHC experiments  All sites also support other virtual organizations

6. 6 Tier-2s Contribution (to WLCG MoU) Computing resources in 2008  Tier-2s : 45 % of the total CPU resources pledged in France Tier-2s planning has been revised according to new estimates of computing capacity requirements Source : http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/planning/phase2_resources/P2PRCcaps170407.pdf http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/planning/phase2_resources/P2PRCcaps170407.pdf CPU [k SI2000]Storage [TB] Eq. Target Tier-2 in France Number of Tiers-2 Target Capacity per T2 in 2008 LCG-France Tiers-2 in 2008 Target Capacity per T2 in 2008 LCG-France Tiers-2 in 2008 Alice 560780145 1,417 Atlas 5801455250345 2,530 CMS 500746140237 1,530 LHCb 400922131 2,211

7. 7 Tier-2s Planned Capacity in 2008

8. 8 Tier-3s Planned Evolution Tier-3, Analysis facilities and EGEE resources (outside MoU)

9. 9 LCG-France sites Tier-2: Subatech Tier-2: LPC Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LLR LPNHE IPNO Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LLR LPNHE IPNO AF: CC-IN2P3 Tier-3: LAPP Tier-1: CC-IN2P3 Tier-3: IPHC Lyon Clermont-Ferrand Ile de France Marseille Nantes Strasbourg Annecy Tier-3: IPNL Tier-3: CPPM Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LPNHE Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LPNHE Tiers of ATLAS

10. 10 ATLAS Planned Capacity in 2008 Target ATLAS T2 CPU Disk AF Tier-2 (dedicated to simulation) MoU contribution eq 1/30 of ATLAS T2

11. 11 ATLAS Tier-2s planned evolution ATLAS resources in Tier-2s

12. 12 Tier-2/Tier-3 Activities LCG-France Tier-2/Tier-3 technical activities officially set up in April 2006  Collaboration tools in place  Mailing list, wiki pages, regular video-conference meetings Activities  Very active in the Quattor working group  Used by most of the LCG-France sites  Network-level and SRM-level data transfer tests from and to tier-1  Including associated foreign sites  CC-IN2P3 support to Tier-2s  Monitoring of collective services (FTS), common infrastructure (Network) http://cctools.in2p3.fr/dcache/monitoring/ftsmonitor.php http://cctools.in2p3.fr/dcache/monitoring/ftsmonitor.php  CPU benchmarking…  Meetings held with several potential hardware providers  Sharing of technical and commercial information (hardware evaluation results, commercial conditions, etc.)  DPM day (advanced session) with S.Lemaitre

13. 13 Tier-2/Tier-3 Activities (cont.) In close contact with some foreign associated tier-2s  Europe  Belgium CMS Tier-2  Romanian Federation ATLAS Tier-2  Asia  IHEP China - ATLAS and CMS Tier2  ICEPP Japan - ATLAS Tier2 In close contact with  EGEE SA1: Grid Operations (ROC support)  with Experiments : LHC computing tracking  CAF (Computing ATLAS-France), TFEP (Task force “Efficacité de production”)  with Network experts in IN2P3 and Renater NREN

14. 14 Site availability survey Trying to define LCG-France site reports Site availability measured as CE & sBDII & SE & SRM from SAM tests https://lcg-sam.cern.ch:8443/sam/sam.py https://lcg-sam.cern.ch:8443/sam/sam.py Data Extraction from SAM (non official) aiming for 95% availability

15. 15 Site availability survey GRIF overall availability benefits from the federation (redundancy of site services instances) Impact of SAM BDII failures (timeout & information instabilities) to be appreciatedtimeoutinformation instabilities Low score of Availability for ATLAS VO (metrics in real conditions) compared to OPS (no space left, permission denied…) Comparaison of overall availability for OPS and ATLAS VO Example of GRIF due to (SRM failures) SAM OPS SAM ATLAS

16. 16 Jobs survey - Country view (from EGEE accounting) Accounting report : Data extracted from the EGEE Country View http://www3.egee.cesga.es/gridsite/accounting/CESGA/country_view.html Accounting enforcement /Benchmarking discussion :(on-going work) CPU time plots require appropriate SpecInt values being published and normalized Apel tool provide average figures irrelevant to heterogeneous farm CCIN2P3 using an adapted accounting normalized per job ~36 % of Total number of jobs are ATLAS jobs

17. 17 ATLAS FR Cloud Tier-2: LPC Ile de France Nantes Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LPNHE Tier-2: GRIF CEA/DAPNIA LAL LPNHE Tier-1: CC-IN2P3 AF: CC-IN2P3 Tier-3: LAPP Marseille Annecy Tier-3: CPPM Pekin Tokyo Roumanie Pekin

18. 18 Network Performance Tests: LyonT1 – TokyoT2 On-going effort from Tokyo and CCIN2P3 experts to make smooth data transfers over long distance network SL4 (kernel 2.6 with BIC TCP) : much better in congestion control than SL3 (kernel 2.4) and Solaris 10. 1-stream 10-stream Lyon to Tokyo: 0-5 MB/s 2-20 MB/s Tokyo to Lyon: 10-15 MB/s 44-60 MB/s (max 100 MB/s) Software Pacer (PSPacer by AIST) in addition: gives a stable and good performance 1-stream 2 to 8-stream Lyon to Tokyo: 45 MB/s 45 MB/s Tokyo to Lyon: 70 MB/s 100 MB/s by courtesy of H.Matsumoto, L.Caillat

19. 19 ATLAS FR Cloud activities CAF activities Monte Carlo Production  Autumn 2006: executor installed at Lyon to distribute production jobs within FR-Cloud.  Production shift organization  FR sites have assumed 16 % of LCG for 2006  FR Cloud Production Monitoring http://atlas-saclay.in2p3.fr/eln/index.php  Improving contacts between production group and siteadmins  Share a clear understanding of what’s going on by courtesy of E.Lançon, J.Schwindling and CAF

20. 20 Do we work well ? ATLAS Monitoring : http://atlas-php.web.cern.ch/atlas-php/DbAdmin/Ora/php 4.3.4/proddb/monitor/OverViews.php http://atlas-php.web.cern.ch/atlas-php/DbAdmin/Ora/php 4.3.4/proddb/monitor/OverViews.php How to improve site efficiency ? Set up Site Alerts but follow-up of errors not so easy

21. 21 Do we work well ? Sites should check : EXECG_GETOUT_EMPTYOUT:. Possible reasons: WNs with local disk full No write rights Dying disk Incorrect ssh keys on the WN … WRAPLCG_WNCHECK_SWMISS: problem with the ATLAS software NFS problems $VO_ATLAS_SW_DIR not correctly defined …

22. 22 Tier-1  Tier-2 LPC LAL Tokyo BEIJING TOKYO SACLAY LPHNE LAPP July 2006 by courtesy of G.Rahal, S.Jezequel DDM Functional Test

23. 23 BADOK

24. 24 ATLAS and Sites concerns Optimizing processing capacity  centralized / distributed, done at VO level or/and site level  VO strategy being pushed to sites / Sites strategy being published  Job priorities based on VOMS group and roles integration Optimizing grid-enable disk storage and integrating data management tools  VOMS group and roles integration, DPM ACLs changes  SRM V2.2, Data access protocols  difficult for Tier-2s to exercise data transfers infrastructure by theirselves Provisioning specific services according to the experiment requirements  compatibility with other VOS, security  clear understanding of specificities and plans Assuming service level and response times  Operating grid services  Assuming experiments activity and Xmas, and Summer periods (laboratories may be closed)

25. 25 Plans for 2007 Storage space provision is a major concern for all Tiers ○Data access patterns required by the expriments ○Managed disk enabled storage : SRM v2.2 implemetation ○File Systems studies (GPFS, Lustre evaluation) and GSI enabled protocols VOMS groups and roles integration Site availability : improve stability despite on-going activities at sites ○Infrastructure consolidation, hardware procurements, OS evolution, Mware upgrade ○Electric and cooling infrastructure is an issue ○Running over XMas, holidays period… Efficiency : Plans for a close collaboration with the new TFEP (Task Force Efficacité de Production) ○Improve the global efficiency of ATLAS production on the FR cloud More on Grid Security in connection with IN2P3 security managers Enhance Tier-2s representation to GDB Improve monitoring Set-up a new SRM-level, FTS data transfers test period if possible

26. 26 Conclusions Additional resources coming from Tier-2s & even Tier-3 initiatives  Not in competition with Tier-1 funding but funding support expected in 2009  Significant effort in terms of Budget, infrastructure, human support… Collaborative work  Within EGEE SA1  Resources and base line services  Within LCG-France  Tier-1 – Tier-2s Tier-3s integration  Enhance collaboration between sites experts and experiment representatives  Relation with the corresponding T1 is fundamental  Working together with experiments  Experiment computing models define tasks distribution, data distribution and specific data flows between Tier-1s and Tier-2s

27. 27 ATLAS and Sites ATLAS CAF Sites LCG-France T2-T3 Thanks to experts from ATLAS, sites and CC - IN2P3 ! Tier-1 CC-IN2P3 experts

28. 28 Reference documents LCG-France Tier-2 Tier-3 Resource Planning 2006-2010 https://edms.in2p3.fr/document/I-008142/ 18/04/2007 update https://edms.in2p3.fr/document/I-008142/ W-LCG Reference documents:  Summary of Regional Centres Capacity 17/04/2007 update http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/planning/phase2_resources/ http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/planning/phase2_resources/ http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/planning/phase2_resources/P2PRCcaps170407.pdf  Revised Computing Capacity Requirements October 2006 http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/MB/revised_resources/ http://lcg.web.cern.ch/LCG/MB/revised_resources/