1 / 12

EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST-2003-508833

First experiences testing the prototype Mario Reale CERN on behalf of JRA-1 middleware testing team. JRA1 all-hands meeting @ RAL June 28-30, 2004. www.eu-egee.org. EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST-2003-508833. Contents. Testing testbed structure

uta-larson
Download Presentation

EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST-2003-508833

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. First experiences testing the prototypeMario Reale CERNon behalf of JRA-1 middleware testing team JRA1 all-hands meeting @ RAL June 28-30, 2004 www.eu-egee.org EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST-2003-508833

  2. Contents • Testing testbed structure • Main encountered problems so far • documentation • keep synchronized • process cycle • Basic prototype behaviour and major bugs • Savannah bug reporting • Conclusions JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 2

  3. current testing testbed based on EGEE GLITE prototype • Cluster of RH 7.3.4 linux boxes • AliEn ( v 1.34-18 ) • Server - Core Services • GAS • UI • DB machine – File Catalog • CE , WN • RLS • R-GMA monbox – SRV (RAL) • VOMS (NIKHEF) • Storage Elements • Classic SE • dCache • Castor • No automatic installation tool – all manual JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 3

  4. encountered difficulties • Documentation on the prototype • spread , sketchy notes available from different sources • we developed installation and configuration guides based on trial and error and some install logs and AliEn doc • Synchronization with the prototype testbed : • A prototype procedure exists – difficulties to stick to it • CVS repository not yet fully populated • SCM autobuild not yet fully in place • Process Cycle • initial resistance to • CVS tag – given the early stage of the prototype • regular RPM delivery • still difficult to identify a clear, unambiguous version of the prot.m/w • difficult to give a fully reliable, exact meaning to bug reporting and crosscheck bugs reported on the prototype testbed JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 4

  5. First experience with the prototype • AliEn components • V 1.34-16 installed on the testbed – after a lot of hand work on top of the provided tools • V 1.34-18 facing major difficulties with service deployment using RPMs : • Provided script fails • We want use official RPMs and not compile code from CVS • Storage Elements • Installed Castor ,dCache, Classic • Essentially untested on the testing testbed, basic tests on the prototype testbed JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 5

  6. First experience with the prototype • RGMA • the rpm does install, but the service does not start correctly. • seems to be designed to deploy with LCFGng • full manual installation and configuration not successful yet • Need clear & complete instructions from JRA1-UK • LRC • Installs and configures fine. • New prototype CE • The rpm does install, but the Condor service with modified files gives segmentation fault ( need to test fix with IT/CZ cluster ) JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 6

  7. prototype behaviour and bugs • Most installation and configuration issues reported during testing testbed set up • Lack or incorrectness of documentation • Dependencies on explicit versions of external packages • Failure of the configuration scripts • Most functionality tests reported using the prototype testbed • Some specific individual component tests performed on the testing testbed machines • Currently (June 23) 5 bugs have been closed, 1 is ready for integration, 10 are ready for test, 19 are open • Rich variety of bug issues : cannot log in, cannot register a file, scripts failing. JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 7

  8. most relevant open install & config bugs • dependencies on explicit or old versions of packages for the service configuration scripts [ 3811 ] • no documentation to install the GAS machine [ 3795 ] • twisted procedures to select the required services to be started on a machine [ 3813 ] • failure looking for Perl and other tools during the build [ 3677 ] • failure of the provided script to configure and start services on DB and CS machine [3839] JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 8

  9. most relevant open functionality bugs • cannot register a file in glite ( loosing connection to the SE) [ 3752, 3775 , 3778 ] • CTRL-C does not stop script [ 3802 ] • Incorrect system (Perl) error reported instead of error messages reflecting the real nature of the problem [ 3856 ] • GENERAL ISSUE in error reporting JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 9

  10. further testing • Need to exploit all provided functionality to understand how to structure and design our testcases and testsuite • GAS advanced features • Metadata handling • R-GMA behavior – whole branch of InfoSys untested • Heavy load the system ( but few ARDA tests ) JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 10

  11. Savannah Bug Reporting System • A couple of comments: • Can’t do bug list by submitter • Cannot automatically re-assign bugs to specific users when status changes JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 11

  12. Conclusions • Some difficulties related to lack of complete, standard and up to date documentation • Hard to keep synchronized with the prototype testbed if RPMs are not promptly delivered at each prototype release cycle • Still major testing and validation on the whole prototype system carried out mostly on the prototype testbed • We are really keen to see all m/w components integrated in the standard SCM cycle, to boost the availability of a complete release on our testbed. JRA1 all-hands meeting, June 28th,2004 - 12

More Related