Hi,
Atlas needs the NFS area for the local configuration scripts and some
libraries. The directory is used through ATLAS_LOCAL_AREA variable.
I think the scripts don't care about the OS and the area doesn't need to
be changed.
I doubt any other small VO is using NFS other than for testing.
cheers
alessandra
On 02/08/2013 10:10, Jeremy Coles wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To answer Stephen's question first: we have informed all UK VOMS hosted VOs about the move to SL6 and encouraged them to make use of available test queues. We have also (at some sites that have moved to SL6) looked for failing jobs from the non-LHC VOs to try and catch issues.
>
> It would be useful if the smaller VOs moved to using CVMFS and EGI has recently started a task force to provide such a service for them. In the meantime it would be wise to get some clarity from the user community as to what is needed backed up by tests. Clearly we do not want to do more than is needed here but we need to be aware of (and inform users of) issues we are aware of that might impact them.
>
> Steve - have you seen the smaller VOs using the existing software area?
> All - (to repeat the earlier question) if you have moved to WNs to SL6, what have you done for the software area?
>
> Once I've gathered more details I can check the EGI view (and perhaps make a recommendation from our experience, such as Ewan's suggestion - we can discuss on Tuesday if enough people are present given the Puppet meeting).
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> On 2 Aug 2013, at 09:43, Daniela Bauer wrote:
>
>> It's too late. I'm not going to tell CMS after months of running that they have to re-install their software only because it *hypothetically* makes some minor VOs life easier. And I'm not starting to point different VOs at different areas, that's a maintenance nightmare.
>>
>> There is no reason for small VOs to be unaware of the advent of SL6, I've certainly heard about it as the MICE VO deputy manager or whatever role I hold. Right now VOs that cannot run on SL6 just ignore that part of our cluster, software areas be damned. I can't see how a new software area forces these VOs to do anything. These VOs will only move when there are no SL5 resources left, at which point, if they really want to start from a clean slate I'm happy to run an rf -rm * in their software area if they can't figure out how to delete stuff themselves, but some how I don't think I'll ever get that request.
>>
>> Officially my last word on this topic, so don't tempt me.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniela
>>
>>
>> On 1 August 2013 17:08, Steve Jones <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've simply mounted the existing software area onto the newer SL6 nodes,
>> with no changes at all - it is the same setup as the older SL5 nodes. The
>> name has sl5 in it (pest). The VO_SW_DIR variable is unchanged.
>>
>> If anything else is needed, it could be sent in a ticket. I'd be glad to
>> do whatever is best. Personally, I think it might work as it is. If not, I
>> guess people will complain. To decide, we'd have to do a study and create
>> a VO consensus. That's the right thing to do, actually, but it's a lot of
>> work and is the buy-in there for it?
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> ----------
>>
>>
>> ihepsoft1:/software/exp_soft_sl5
>> 2635987968 2001361600 634626368 76% /opt/exp_soft_sl5
>> cvmfs2 102400000 54275866 48124135 54% /cvmfs/atlas.cern.ch
>> cvmfs2 102400000 216727 102183274 1%
>> /cvmfs/atlas-condb.cern.ch
>> cvmfs2 102400000 2732162 99667839 3% /cvmfs/lhcb.cern.ch
>> cvmfs2 102400000 86763 102313238 1%
>> /cvmfs/mice.gridpp.ac.uk
>> cvmfs2 102400000 16250 102383751 1%
>> /cvmfs/na62.gridpp.ac.uk
>> cvmfs2 102400000 5746325 96653676 6%
>> /cvmfs/hone.gridpp.ac.uk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
>>>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of RAUL H C LOPES
>>>> Sent: 31 July 2013 12:29
>>>>
>>>> They've never written in that area. Neither Atlas or LHCB.
>>>> so... are we allowed to clean them?
>>>>
>>> For VOs that have moved to CVMFS, if your VO_XXX_SW_DIR environment
>>> variable point to CVMFS (as they should for at least LHCb, CMS and
>>> ATLAS), then you can definitely clean them up - VO software areas
>>> aren't mounted in a standard place, so if the environment doesn't
>>> point to them, there's no proper way the VO could find the old area
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> For OS version upgrades, I'd definitely go with a new, blank area,
>>> but make sure to blank the CE tags areas in sync with that so that
>>> you're not advertising tags for things you don't have any more.
>>> I'm not sure anyone actually uses CE software tags for anything,
>>> mind, but it's the principle of the thing.
>>>
>>> Ewan
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from the pit of despair
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> [log in to unmask]
>> HEP Group/Physics Dep
>> Imperial College
>> London, SW7 2BW
>> Tel: +44-(0)20-75947810
>> http://www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/~dbauer/
--
Facts aren't facts if they come from the wrong people. (Paul Krugman)
|