Yes, thanks.
When I saw 33%, it was shock and horror - I should have paused and read
the thread!
Ste
On 2016-12-07 22:19, Jeremy Coles wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> Did you see John’s response earlier?
>
> The suggestion is "an LHCb SAM client bug and not a site issue”. This
> will be checked and you will likely want to get a revised figure
> calculated.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
>
>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 22:02, sjones <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jeremy,
>>
>> On 2016-12-07 16:52, Jeremy Coles wrote:
>>> Please could: RHUL, Glasgow and Liverpool send me some brief text on
>>> the difficulties encountered during the month.
>>
>> There were no significant difficulties in November at Liverpool
>> regarding availability and reliability prior to a power cut in late
>> November that wiped out our ARC/Condor CE, but we recovered within 6
>> hours or so. Thus we did practically a full month of work at near 100%
>> reliability & availability.
>>
>> My figures suggest we made 6.3 million hs06 hours of work for lhcb in
>> Nov, which is indicative of (say) 99% uptime. It would not be possible
>> if we were up only 33% of the time. I'll check this in the morning but
>> this looks like a serious measurement error to me.
>>
>> To do that, I need to know; what is the basis of the 33% measurement,
>> and who is responsible for making it?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Ste
|