Dear GridPP site administrators
Thank you to those of you who responded to the request below. Site
availability will be discussed on Monday by the GridPP PMB, therefore
this is a last chance reminder to the sites that have yet to provide any
high-level summary of their site trend/performance
(http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/wiki/SAM_availability:_May-July_2007). A quick
survey suggests these sites are in this position:
UKI-LT2-Brunel
UKI-LT2-UCL-CENTRAL
UKI-LT2-UCL-HEP
UKI-NORTHGRID-MAN-HEP
UKI-NORTHGRID-SHEF-HEP
UKI-SOUTHGRID-CAM-HEP
UKI-SOUTHGRID-OX-HEP
I'd also encourage you all to reply to Philippa's email regarding UKI
ROC priorities for the TCG. Our votes (or lack of them) will influence
what is considered most important for developers to spend time on and
this does directly impact most of you! Thanks.
Have a good weekend,
Jeremy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Coles, J (Jeremy)
> Sent: 25 July 2007 15:41
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: GridPP site administrators - site availability trends
available
> for comment
>
> Dear GridPP site administrators
>
> I have been asked by the GridPP Project Management Board (PMB - meets
> weekly as I'm sure you know) to report on the availability of GridPP
> sites on a monthly basis starting in August.
>
> As a precursor to my report due on Monday 6th August I have started
> reviewing the SAM availability figures. In the same way that I
provided
> a view of each site's Steve Lloyd test performance against the GridPP
> average, I have now uploaded results for individual site availability
> against the GridPP average. You will find the graphs here:
> http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/wiki/SAM_availability:_May-July_2007. We all
> know that SAM still has problems and we can see evidence of this in
the
> average availability line. However, one purpose of this review is to
> understand what level of availability is possible (looking across all
> site results) and to focus on helping sites with relatively poor
> availability.
>
> The target availability figure for July is 85%. Based on data
currently
> available each site's name is either in green (> target) or red (<
> target) depending on whether it has met this for the last month or
not.
> In addition I have extracted the normalised KSI2K CPU hrs for each
site
> from APEL (from the start of June until today) to give some idea of
the
> relative site contributions. In doing this I discovered that a number
of
> sites do not have a full APEL history (the KSI2K hrs figures appear in
> red font for such sites).
>
> These plots will drive some of the discussion at tomorrow's UKI
monthly
> deployment meeting:
> http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=19090. There are a
> number of good reasons why a site may have a lower availability than
the
> average - SRM instabilities after an upgrade, overloaded CE etc.
> Therefore I invite you to add site comments to the wiki to explain
> periods of poor availability and what was done to resolve any
problem(s)
> encountered*. PMB members will receive these explanations along with
the
> data.
>
> Many thanks for your time,
> Jeremy
>
>
> *P.S I know that *some* sites offer good explanations each week in the
> site reports. At the moment extracting this information is a very
manual
> task so I would appreciate the high-level explanations.
|