Aslam,
What are you doing about keeping a safe offsite copy - do you have another data centre and replicate to there
We are looking at the option of a tape library in another building - keep getting asked the question - if the main system fails how long will it take to restore?
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
-----Original Message-----
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Aslam Ghumra (IT Services, Facilities Management)
Sent: 14 October 2014 09:04
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Research data quota take up
We at Birmingham have a similar approach and are also debating on the initial quota. However the following is
Tier1 : Research Data Store (RDS) ; currently to be implemented, will give 5TB of 'working storage' for free, if more is requested then we will give the researchers a price, which we encourage the researchers to add into their grant proposals.
Tier2 : Research Data Archive (RDA); we offer 1TB of free storage, but more can be given / purchased. This is the MidPlus archive solution which QMUL / Warwick are also part of.
Tier3 : Tape storage - This is something we are looking at for the future.
We do understand that some of our colleges will produce huge amounts of data and others very little or none, so we will give out 1Tb and oversubscribe.
Aslam Ghumra
Research Data Management
T: 0121 414 5877
Skype : JanitorX
-----Original Message-----
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of RESEARCH-DATAMAN automatic digest system
Sent: 14 October 2014 00:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RESEARCH-DATAMAN Digest - 10 Oct 2014 to 13 Oct 2014 (#2014-140)
There are 16 messages totaling 4335 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Research data quota takeup (13)
2. Research data quota takeup / archiving (3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:00:07 +0000
From: Anna Clements <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:32:43 +0100
From: John Milner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it's not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:59:52 +0000
From: Anna Clements <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Thanks, John
I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage. It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
Anna
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
________________________________
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don’t know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it’s not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:35:02 +0100
From: Tim Banks <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I'm also intrigued by this notion of a flat allocation per researcher meeting their data storage needs.
I know plenty of arts and humanities researchers who could never fill 1TB even with a whole career's worth of data.
I also know researchers working with large climate models and in genome sequencing who would tear through 1TB of active storage in a week.
So, I'm interested if anybody has worked on a true needs-based assessment of active storage provision and if so what the results were.
Many thanks,
Tim
------------------------
Faculty IT Manager, IT
Faculties of PVAC & ESSL
University of Leeds
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Milner
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it's not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:35:55 +0000
From: Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Anna,
We are going through this process ourselves and looking at quotas
We are considering a 3 tier approach
Tier 1 for currently being used for analysis and moved from local servers to free up space for more local analysis Tier 2 for data that was used in publications and needs to be made available due to funding source Tier 3 'cold' long term storage - not being analysed currently or for foreseeable future and too good to throw away
I think Bristol and others are already doing this but one option to be considered is to let them have 1TB free but pay for more Will be talking with Finance to see how RDM charges can be included in grant proposals.
Had a visit to Institute of Cancer Research and they encourage users to look for reasons to throw away data
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Thanks, John
I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage. It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
Anna
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
________________________________
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it's not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:53:00 +0100
From: John Milner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Although I can't help with numbers, a good way to manage unpredictable costs is to use cloud storage. Janet has negotiated a good arrangement for access to AWS and I think there's a deal on AZURE in the offing. So as you run out of internal capacity you can use cloud to give you time assess whether you need to expand your own storage or get rid of some content!
I know that Southampton, Bristol and Oxford have experience in this area, so you could try them direct. I should be able to get some contacts if you don't know people there.
Best Wishes
John
John K. Milner
Meadow House
Baunton
Cirencester
GL7 7BB
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Thanks, John
I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage. It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
Anna
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
_____
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it's not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:06:08 +0100
From: Kevin Ashley <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't think enough people have been doing this for long enough to get good data about uptake and demand management. The exception may be Leicester who have had such a policy for a few years now.
However, there's another way to approach this with a fair degree of rigour that provides some reassurance that you aren't making an open-ended commitment.
Gather information in advance about researcher's current storage use and requirements, or use the figures from someone else who has done this. You can gather the figures using a mechanism such as the DCC's DAF
(http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/repository-audit-and-assessment/data-asset-framework)
or you could look at what researchers are saying in data management plans.
The aim then is to provide central storage that satisfies a high percentage of projects (90% or 95%) & call that business as usual and pay for it from overheads. Any larger requirement by definition is now not business as usual and therefore it is acceptable to levy a charge for it which needs to be reflected in the research proposal.
That's how others have come up with their 1 Tbyte or 500 Gbyte figures. You aren't making an open-ended promise. You may end up stimulating some demand, but that's a good thing. Not every Kbyte will be used for its intended purpose, but that isn't critical and there are ways that you can control and monitor that if necessary.
As for growth, it is difficult to be certain but one can put some bounds on it.
If your university has a target for research income for future years, then start by assuming growth in that figure will relate linearly to growth in storage requirements. At Edinburgh, I know we're also assuming that not everyone will take up their full quota and that take-up of any sort will take a year or two to complete. The actual amount of installed storage takes account of this. Those in IT services who deal with capacity planning ought to have a good understanding of these areas already.
best regards
Kevin
On 13/10/14 11:59, Anna Clements wrote:
> Thanks, John
>
> I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage.
> It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what
> our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan
> costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
>
> Anna
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
>
> University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16
> 9TR|
> T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
> **
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> *From:* Research Data Management discussion list
> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner
> [[log in to unmask]]
> *Sent:* 13 October 2014 11:32
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Research data quota takeup
>
> I don’t know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at
> this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use
> centralised services it’s not possible to distinguish between data
> that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
>
> John K. Milner
>
> Tel 00 44 1285 643731
>
> Mob +44 7836 341550
>
> Mail to: [log in to unmask]
>
> *From:*Research Data Management discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Anna Clements
> *Sent:* 13 October 2014 11:00
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Research data quota takeup
>
> All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
>
> We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to
> provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all
> our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
>
> Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and
> service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
>
> Many thanks
>
> Anna
> _________
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
>
> University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16
> 9TR|
> T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
>
--
Kevin Ashley. Director, Digital Curation Centre http://www.dcc.ac.uk/
E: [log in to unmask] @kevingashley http://slideshare.net/kevinashley
T: +44 131 651 3823 P: DCC, Appleton Tower, Crichton St, Edinburgh EH8 9LE
M: +44 7817 402 498 DCC Helpdesk: +44 131 651 1239
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:15:21 +0000
From: Sebastian Rahtz <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I would suggest that worrying about and enforcing quotas is not a useful way to spend time and resources - quickly expanding storage space locally or in the cloud ought to be fairly easy for our institutions these days.
The key aim should be about education - working with researchers on their own data management plans, and getting them to make decisions about whether data is to be kept or not. Making storage quota an area of conflict or any kind between departments and the centre is not good :-}
--
Sebastian Rahtz
Director (Research) of Academic IT
University of Oxford IT Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
Não sou nada.
Nunca serei nada.
Não posso querer ser nada.
À parte isso, tenho em mim todos os sonhos do mundo.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:29:00 +0000
From: Stephen Welburn <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
At QMUL, we have an option for research projects to get 1TB of free active research data storage (via SFTP / attached to our HPC cluster, friendlier options TBA). We have had some bulk requests for access (e.g. all PIs that use specific facilities) but I suspect that apart from users that really use large amounts of storage the amount of space used is significantly less than 1TB - we have had some labs shifting data from the USB HDD collection to the research data storage. Above 1TB, we charge an annual fee for storage, and the availability of storage ends at the end of the associated research project.
Currently we have ca. 80 groups using it, and a large proportion of the usage is across a small number of heavy users. These users usually go above the 1TB level and then contribute back to the costs. It must also be said that part of the aim here has also been to get users to switch from local compute servers to using centralised HPC resources, hence the link between HPC and the current storage.
So long as the storage is "free", we also get to define the rules for appropriate use, and processes regarding that appropriate use of the storage will need to set up - e.g. monitoring for (non-research) music and video files and for insecure storage for data which should be stored securely. However, this is theoretical at the moment as we're not yet at the stage where we need to be actively concerned.
Part of the question is what the data is worth to the institution. At an individual researcher level, the risk of data loss may be low, but with 100s of researchers the risk across the institution is significantly higher (if 700 users each keep their data 99.9% safe, then across the institution there is less than a 50% chance of all their data being safe). At an institution-level, data-loss is happening all the time - albeit usually in small ways (lost USB sticks, deleted files etc.). If the institution wants to be seen as a suitable home for research, then it needs to accept that it needs to provide the infrastructure to support it.
Steve Welburn
--
Steve Welburn, BA MSc PhD
Research Consultant - IT Services Research Queen Mary University of London
Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 6939
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:07:21 +0000
From: Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Stephen,
The statement 'availability of storage ends at the end of the associated research project' implies that you are looking after 'active' data with this resource - what do you do about archiving data once projects have completed
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Welburn
Sent: 13 October 2014 13:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
At QMUL, we have an option for research projects to get 1TB of free active research data storage (via SFTP / attached to our HPC cluster, friendlier options TBA). We have had some bulk requests for access (e.g. all PIs that use specific facilities) but I suspect that apart from users that really use large amounts of storage the amount of space used is significantly less than 1TB - we have had some labs shifting data from the USB HDD collection to the research data storage. Above 1TB, we charge an annual fee for storage, and the availability of storage ends at the end of the associated research project.
Currently we have ca. 80 groups using it, and a large proportion of the usage is across a small number of heavy users. These users usually go above the 1TB level and then contribute back to the costs. It must also be said that part of the aim here has also been to get users to switch from local compute servers to using centralised HPC resources, hence the link between HPC and the current storage.
So long as the storage is "free", we also get to define the rules for appropriate use, and processes regarding that appropriate use of the storage will need to set up - e.g. monitoring for (non-research) music and video files and for insecure storage for data which should be stored securely. However, this is theoretical at the moment as we're not yet at the stage where we need to be actively concerned.
Part of the question is what the data is worth to the institution. At an individual researcher level, the risk of data loss may be low, but with 100s of researchers the risk across the institution is significantly higher (if 700 users each keep their data 99.9% safe, then across the institution there is less than a 50% chance of all their data being safe). At an institution-level, data-loss is happening all the time - albeit usually in small ways (lost USB sticks, deleted files etc.). If the institution wants to be seen as a suitable home for research, then it needs to accept that it needs to provide the infrastructure to support it.
Steve Welburn
--
Steve Welburn, BA MSc PhD
Research Consultant - IT Services Research Queen Mary University of London
Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 6939
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:36:08 +0000
From: Stephen Welburn <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup / archiving
I did say it was "active research data storage"... and at the moment, it's not full so it doesn't require immediate archivability. Archiving is a whole other world which we need to figure out.
The main options at the moment appear to be around Amazon Glacier type storage or Arkivum. If anyone has any sensible suggestions, then they'd be appreciated.
There is so much research in progress at the moment that the archiving of new projects feels a long-term goal - and what we do with the outputs of existing research depends on existing budgets.
Steve Welburn
--
Steve Welburn, BA MSc PhD
Research Consultant - IT Services Research Queen Mary University of London
Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 6939
[log in to unmask]
From: Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: Research Data Management discussion list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Monday, 13 October 2014 14:07
To: Research Data Management discussion list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Stephen,
The statement 'availability of storage ends at the end of the associated research project' implies that you are looking after 'active' data with this resource - what do you do about archiving data once projects have completed
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:49:12 +0100
From: John Milner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup / archiving
There's grave doubt about the long term cost effectiveness of Glacier, but we think Arkivum is pretty good. It's telling that when Janet went out to tender to establish a long term archiving framework, with guarantees on data integrity, there were only two responses and Arkivum won by a country mile.
John K. Milner
Mail to: [log in to unmask]
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Welburn
Sent: 13 October 2014 14:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup / archiving
I did say it was "active research data storage". and at the moment, it's not full so it doesn't require immediate archivability. Archiving is a whole other world which we need to figure out.
The main options at the moment appear to be around Amazon Glacier type storage or Arkivum. If anyone has any sensible suggestions, then they'd be appreciated.
There is so much research in progress at the moment that the archiving of new projects feels a long-term goal - and what we do with the outputs of existing research depends on existing budgets.
Steve Welburn
--
Steve Welburn, BA MSc PhD
Research Consultant - IT Services Research
Queen Mary University of London
Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 6939
[log in to unmask]
From: Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Research Data Management discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, 13 October 2014 14:07
To: Research Data Management discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Stephen,
The statement 'availability of storage ends at the end of the associated research project' implies that you are looking after 'active' data with this resource - what do you do about archiving data once projects have completed
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 16:36:05 +0100
From: Angus Whyte <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup / archiving
This seems like a good time to shamelessly plug an event DCC is hosting in Edinburgh on 27 October, with Arkivum, Janet and U. of Edinburgh colleagues. This will look at the Janet framework agreement with Arkivum (full disclosure, they are sponsoring the event). Also on the agenda is a status update on Edinburgh's RDM service, an Edinburgh researcher's perspective on storage needs, and the role that advice to researchers on 'what to keep' should play in managing long-term storage.
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/data-storage-preservation-strategies-for-rdm-registration-12559671315
best wishes,
--
Dr Angus Whyte
Senior Institutional Support Officer
Digital Curation Centre
University of Edinburgh
On 13/10/2014 14:49, John Milner wrote:
>
> There's grave doubt about the long term cost effectiveness of Glacier,
> but we think Arkivum is pretty good. It's telling that when Janet
> went out to tender to establish a long term archiving framework, with
> guarantees on data integrity, there were only two responses and
> Arkivum won by a country mile.
>
> John K. Milner
>
> Mail to: [log in to unmask]
>
> *From:*Research Data Management discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Stephen
> Welburn
> *Sent:* 13 October 2014 14:36
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Research data quota takeup / archiving
>
> I did say it was "active research data storage"... and at the moment,
> it's not full so it doesn't require immediate archivability. Archiving
> is a whole other world which we need to figure out.
>
> The main options at the moment appear to be around Amazon Glacier type
> storage or Arkivum. If anyone has any sensible suggestions, then
> they'd be appreciated.
>
> There is so much research in progress at the moment that the archiving
> of new projects feels a long-term goal -- and what we do with the
> outputs of existing research depends on existing budgets.
>
> Steve Welburn
>
> --
>
> Steve Welburn, BA MSc PhD
>
> Research Consultant - IT Services Research
>
> Queen Mary University of London
>
> Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 6939
>
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> *From: *Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> *Reply-To: *Research Data Management discussion list
> <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> *Date: *Monday, 13 October 2014 14:07
> *To: *Research Data Management discussion list
> <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> *Subject: *Re: Research data quota takeup
>
> Stephen,
>
> The statement 'availability of storage ends at the end of the
> associated research project' implies that you are looking after
> 'active' data with this resource -- what do you do about archiving
> data once projects have completed
>
> Ricky
>
> Tel: o289o973955
>
> Information Services
>
> 71 University Road
>
> Queen's University Belfast
>
> Belfast BT7 1NF
>
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 16:18:09 +0100
From: Jeremy Harrington <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Just to clarify the comment re the Institute of Cancer Research, the point I think Richard is referring to is that we encourage (but do not mandate) next gen sequencing users to throw away any large data resulting from early and intermediate steps in analysis and processing relatively quickly and when appropriate. Otherwise there's a tendency to forget about it or let it sit on expensive scratch disks forever.
So the comment is specific to NGS data and pipelines and not general research data. I'd hate people to think we encourage researchers to discard research data generally!
Jeremy Harrington | IT Director
The Institute of Cancer Research | 15 Cotswold Road | Belmont | Sutton | Surrey | SM2 5NG
Tel: +44 (0)208 722 4055 | Mob: +44 (0)7919 282029
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Web: www.icr.ac.uk<http://www.icr.ac.uk/> | Please follow us on Twitter: @ICRnews: Facebook: www.facebook.com/theinstituteofcancerresearch<http://www.facebook.com/theinstituteofcancerresearch>
Making the discoveries that defeat cancer
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard Rankin
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Anna,
We are going through this process ourselves and looking at quotas
We are considering a 3 tier approach
Tier 1 for currently being used for analysis and moved from local servers to free up space for more local analysis Tier 2 for data that was used in publications and needs to be made available due to funding source Tier 3 'cold' long term storage - not being analysed currently or for foreseeable future and too good to throw away
I think Bristol and others are already doing this but one option to be considered is to let them have 1TB free but pay for more Will be talking with Finance to see how RDM charges can be included in grant proposals.
Had a visit to Institute of Cancer Research and they encourage users to look for reasons to throw away data
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Thanks, John
I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage. It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
Anna
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
________________________________
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don't know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it's not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
The Institute of Cancer Research: Royal Cancer Hospital, a charitable Company Limited by Guarantee, Registered in England under Company No. 534147 with its Registered Office at 123 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3RP.
This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message f
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 17:19:44 +0100
From: Kevin Ashley <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
On 13/10/14 16:18, Jeremy Harrington wrote:
> Just to clarify the comment re the Institute of Cancer Research, the
> point I think Richard is referring to is that we encourage (but do not
> mandate) next gen sequencing users to throw away any large data
> resulting from early and intermediate steps in analysis and processing
> relatively quickly and when appropriate. Otherwise there's a tendency
> to forget about it or let it sit on expensive scratch disks forever.
>
> So the comment is specific to NGS data and pipelines and not general
> research data. I’d hate people to think we encourage researchers to
> discard research data generally!
>
No need to be concerned - I think you are setting a good example to others in encouraging people to manage disposal as well as retention of data. One paradoxical conclusion from better data management is that the result will inevitably mean we end up discarding even more data than before. The cost of generating data is falling far faster than the cost of storing it, so more disposal is inevitable.
We want to aim for a situation where we are in greater control of the process; instead of losing stuff arbitrarily, we get rid of things in a way that's driven by policy and can be documented. We won't always get it right but it's better than any of the alternatives.
Time for another shameless plug for the DCC guidance in this area:
http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/how-guides/appraise-select-data
It's 4 years old now but still relevant. We've got something new in the pipeline to provide a simple checklist based on this guidance.
--
Kevin Ashley. Director, Digital Curation Centre http://www.dcc.ac.uk/
E: [log in to unmask] @kevingashley http://slideshare.net/kevinashley
T: +44 131 651 3823 P: DCC, Appleton Tower, Crichton St, Edinburgh EH8 9LE
M: +44 7817 402 498 DCC Helpdesk: +44 131 651 1239
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 18:41:48 +0000
From: Richard Rankin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Jeremy,
Sorry for the quote out of context.On checking my notes it was a discussion specific to NGS data and pipelines as that was the focus of our discussions
Ricky
________________________________
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Jeremy Harrington [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 16:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Just to clarify the comment re the Institute of Cancer Research, the point I think Richard is referring to is that we encourage (but do not mandate) next gen sequencing users to throw away any large data resulting from early and intermediate steps in analysis and processing relatively quickly and when appropriate. Otherwise there's a tendency to forget about it or let it sit on expensive scratch disks forever.
So the comment is specific to NGS data and pipelines and not general research data. I’d hate people to think we encourage researchers to discard research data generally!
Jeremy Harrington | IT Director
The Institute of Cancer Research | 15 Cotswold Road | Belmont | Sutton | Surrey | SM2 5NG
Tel: +44 (0)208 722 4055 | Mob: +44 (0)7919 282029
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Web: www.icr.ac.uk<http://www.icr.ac.uk/> | Please follow us on Twitter: @ICRnews: Facebook: www.facebook.com/theinstituteofcancerresearch<http://www.facebook.com/theinstituteofcancerresearch>
Making the discoveries that defeat cancer
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard Rankin
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Anna,
We are going through this process ourselves and looking at quotas
We are considering a 3 tier approach
Tier 1 for currently being used for analysis and moved from local servers to free up space for more local analysis Tier 2 for data that was used in publications and needs to be made available due to funding source Tier 3 ‘cold’ long term storage – not being analysed currently or for foreseeable future and too good to throw away
I think Bristol and others are already doing this but one option to be considered is to let them have 1TB free but pay for more Will be talking with Finance to see how RDM charges can be included in grant proposals.
Had a visit to Institute of Cancer Research and they encourage users to look for reasons to throw away data
Ricky
Tel: o289o973955
Information Services
71 University Road
Queen's University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NF
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 12:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
Thanks, John
I agree ... but we can't just ask for an open-ended amount of storage. It's more to do with have a reasonably confident way to predict what our growth in central storage requirements will be so we can plan costs. I know this is difficult, but hearing how others have managed this would be really useful.
Anna
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
________________________________
From: Research Data Management discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Milner [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Research data quota takeup
I don’t know who asked you the question, but surely the whole point at this stage is to stimulate demand. Unless people are persuaded to use centralised services it’s not possible to distinguish between data that MUST be preserved, data that SHOULD be preserved and data that can be thrown away!
John K. Milner
Tel 00 44 1285 643731
Mob +44 7836 341550
Mail to: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
Sent: 13 October 2014 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Research data quota takeup
All (and apologies if I have already asked you!)
We are finalising our research data storage policy and struggling to provide evidence that if we make 1TB (or whatever) available to all our PIs then we won't just be stimulating demand rather than responding to need.
Interested in the experience of those who have a quota policy and service already rolled out. Have you been able to manage demand ok?
Many thanks
Anna
_________
______________________________________________________
Anna Clements | Head of Research Data and Information Services
University of St Andrews Library | North Street | St Andrews | KY16 9TR|
T:01334 462761 | @AnnaKClements
The Institute of Cancer Research: Royal Cancer Hospital, a charitable Company Limited by Guarantee, Registered in England under Company No. 534147 with its Registered Office at 123 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3RP.
This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your computer and network.
------------------------------
End of RESEARCH-DATAMAN Digest - 10 Oct 2014 to 13 Oct 2014 (#2014-140)
***********************************************************************
|
