1 / 1

De Witt, Shaun (STFC), Huang, Jhen-Wei (ASGC)

Tier 1 Site Evolution In Response to Experiment Requirements. De Witt, Shaun (STFC), Huang, Jhen-Wei (ASGC). Challenge is to meet the requirements of Disk/Tape Separation: Tape is becoming more of a true archival medium, tending towards the ideal WORN ( W rite O nce, R ead N ever)

Download Presentation

De Witt, Shaun (STFC), Huang, Jhen-Wei (ASGC)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Tier 1 Site Evolution In Response to Experiment Requirements De Witt, Shaun (STFC), Huang, Jhen-Wei (ASGC) • Challenge is to meet the requirements of Disk/Tape Separation: • Tape is becoming more of a true archival medium, tending towards the ideal WORN (Write Once, Read Never) • Tape is cheap, but prone to wear after 5-10k mounts • Slow to read • Disk at all Tiers is becoming more like a cache • If the file exists on disk somewhere else, use that copy, only go to tape as a last resort. • Xrootd fallback is the vehicle for this. • User jobs should only access disk pool; only production jobs should access the tape system • Two Methods to achieve this: Physical and Logical Separation Physical Separation (ASGC) Logical Separation (STFC) FTS FTS Storage System 1 Storage System 1 Storage System 2 Disk Cache Disk Pool Disk Pool Disk Cache Tape System Tape System Tape System (CASTOR) Disk System (DPM) • Provide Two Separate End Points • Advantages: • True Disk/Tape Separation (no ‘backdoors’) • Ability to select Best Solution for Each Task • Can optimise performance separately • Access to Tape System easily restricted to allowed users • Based on VOMS role • Two systems can be upgraded independently • No blanket downtime • Disadvantages: • Requires deployment of two (different) storage systems • May require extra staff, particularly if both storage systems are different • Not easy to move hardware between cache and pool • Provide Single End Point • Advantages: • Fewer systems to manage (lower staff costs potentially) • Relatively easy to move hardware between disk pool and tape cache • Potentially lower licensing costs • Disadvantages: • Difficult to restrict user access to disk cache • STFC use ACL’s and VOMS information • Risk of ‘leakage’ if a user recalls a tape file directly onto the disk pool • Storage system is a Single Point of Failure • FTS or lcgutils Mediates Transfer between tape cache and disk • 3rd Party GridFTP is the usual protocol (but could use xrdcp) • In case of logical separation, other protocols such as file are possible (if supported) • Compute Nodes only read from disk pool • Access to tape is both restricted and planned such that typically many files are ‘staged’ in one hitto minimise tape mounts CHEP 2013, Amsterdam October 14-18

More Related