GridPP PMB Meeting 514 (20.01.14) ================================= Present: Dave Britton (Chair), Pete Gronbech, Andrew Sansum, Jeremy Coles, Tony Doyle, Dave Kelsey, Steve Lloyd, Dave Colling, Tony Cass, Roger Jones, Pete Clarke, Claire Devereux (Minutes - Suzanne Scott) Apologies: None 1. The GridPP5 Proposal ======================== DB noted that today's meeting was specifically focussing on the GridPP5 proposal - the status of all documents would be checked. PC reported that there was a service infrastructure funding round which was due imminently. He had noted the email exchanges on what should be included in the Proposal - it was understood that STFC had requested 'flat cash' and 50% scenarios, however he suggested that we add 'minimum acceptable' and 'minimum viable' scenarios, also that we should include one entitled 'optimal', ie: what we would like if there were the possibility of no constraints. PC advised that a new consultation was due to be launched in relation to infrastructure priorities from BIS and that funds might be available from that. DB considered that we could be in a difficult situation if the funding was cut and we tried to get a hardware grant from BIS which we couldn't support - the division of hardware and resource was very difficult to manage. The hardware level we needed was around Ł11-12 million but in a de-scoped scenario the likelihood was only for Ł6-7 million. TD thought that in all scenarios we should assume that through a secondary process hardware might become available and that we should tune the scenarios accordingly. DB noted that we wouldn't know the outcome of the BIS consultation until it was too late; he had spoken to Janet Seed and she had been positive about the possibilities within the BIS consultation. DB added that he had received an email from Tony Medland, who advised that the Strategic Review Panel would assess a realistic scale of funding to support the STFC experimental programme - TM had warned that we could not simply give a 'flat cash' and a 'doomsday' scenario - intermediate options should be included. AS had suggested four scenarios and DB considered that including a couple of intermediate options would be useful - it would enable the balancing of functionality vs risk. This would cover the 'middle' ground of Ł4-5 million funding, wherease the Ł3.5 million scenario was a complete disaster. The option of a de-scoped Tier-1 would be around Ł6 million. Therefore we should provide project scenarios at Ł7 million; Ł6 million; Ł4.5 million and a Ł3.5 million, which would show the step-change risk from 'flat cash' to no Tier-1 at all. This would give a clear picture to the Strategic Review Panel. RJ agreed, noting that we needed to identify clearly the risks at each level, especially capital. PC suggested that if there were any real optimism about the Infrastructure funding, perhaps STFC could provide bridging funding until the BIS outcome were known? We should raise this issue at the Strategic Review. DB asked the PMB if we should provide the range of scenarios as discussed? This was agreed. DB noted that the document outline details would therefore be changed. The status of the documents was next reviewed: A. Tier-2 (SL) --------------- SL had circulated his draft document - he had been unsure as to what the slant should be - the document outlines where we are at the moment, however is it meant to be a proposal or background information only? DB advised that the document would help formulate the arguments regarding leverage etc. SL noted that some information was still missing - he needed a line of information from each site. PG would chase this up. ACTION 514.1 PG to chase-up the sites regarding a line of information required from them to insert into SL's Tier-2 document. PG would check what hardware was available at sites and ascertain which ones could potentially be expanded. SL noted that he needed information from CMS and LHCb about the computing models. Inputs to SL as soon as possible. ACTION 514.2 DC/PC to provide information about their computing models to SL for the Tier-2 document. B. Tier-1 (AS) --------------- DB advised AS that the document which AS had circulated would be very useful for the proposal. AS confirmed he would progress his document. C. Technical Overview (DC) --------------------------- DC confirmed that he should have a draft available by midweek this week. D. Deployment, Ops & Support (JC/TD) ------------------------------------- JC reported that progress was being made - he had discussed with TD who would contribute to what sections: DK would contribute on security and CD would contribute on the international situation/context. DB advised JC that he must focus on the most important issues and provide hard-hitting facts. E. Experiment Requirements (DB) -------------------------------- DB reported that he had been working on this, looking at CERN requirements in comparison with his spreadsheet on hardware. The draft was nearly ready. F. Rationale for 50% plan (DB) ------------------------------- DB noted that this must now be adapted to cover intermediate levels and risks in light of what was discussed today - he needs to revise this. He would circulate it by the end of the week. DB summarised that all documents now appeared to be in progress, however by Friday of this week we must have a completed document that would form the basis of the arguments we were going to make. All draft documents must be completed and circulated by Friday. These drafts would be reviewed next Monday then the writing of the proposal itself would be mapped-out. STANDING ITEMS ============== SI-0 Development Group Report ------------------------------ DC reported that there had been a meeting last Friday, and he provided a link for the Minutes: https://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=0&materialId=minutes&confId=295905 ATLAS had been running well, with an image, and were running simulation. They may look at Oxford again. CMS were focused on HLT, the VM was running again after about 20 minutes and was working well. There were 3,500 jobs on that, which they will suspend and resume, it was going reasonably well. Regarding LHCb there had been staff changes and there would be a development meeting taking place tomorrow to evaluate how to move forward. PG reported that at the GDB there had been a cloud focus, and much confusion there between the different usages of virtual machines and sites. DC agreed, and considered the meeting had been highly unproductive. They needed to get things working. JC agreed there was no common understanding of the areas. SI-1 Dissemination Report -------------------------- SL reported on behalf of Tom Whyntie as follows: ### instantUI news item published A new item on Steve Jones's instantUI tool has been published on the GridPP website. EGI (through Neasan) have picked it up and may follow up with a blog post. Useful links: > * [instantUI: work with the grid from anywhere](http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/news/?p=3137); > * [The instantUI GridPP wiki guidelines](https://www.gridpp.ac.uk/wiki/User_Interface_%28UI%2_to_support_approved_VOs). ### CERN@school software deployed with CVMFS Thanks to Catalin Condurache (RAL Tier-1), the CERN@school VO(cernatschool.org) can now deploy software to the grid using CVMFS.The nest step will be uploading the students' software; the most likely candidate for this is code that processes calibration data obtained from the Insitute of Experimental and Applied Physics (IEAP), Czech Technical University in Prague for the Langton Ultimate Cosmic ray Intensity Detector (LUCID) experiment. SI-2 ATLAS weekly review & plans --------------------------------- RJ noted not much to report, they were struggling with storage areas getting full however sites were responding. SI-3 CMS weekly review & plans ------------------------------- DC noted he was in discussion with CMS computing management regarding the GridPP scenarios for GridPP5. SI-4 LHCb weekly review & plans -------------------------------- PC noted nothing to raise. SI-5 Production Manager's Report --------------------------------- JC reported as follows: 1) A WLCG T2 availability/reliability report for December was circulated last week: http://sam-reports.web.cern.ch/sam-reports/2013/201312/wlcg/WLCG_Tier2_OPS_Dec2013.pdf . There were no UK requests for re-computation, but I am still waiting for explanations from some (of the 4) sites that were under 90% and will review these next week. 2) One of the concerns raised at the HEPSYSMAN meeting last Monday was about the future of batch system support. This will be discussed at the WLCG/HEPiX level in coming months. Condor with the ARC CE is gaining some attention as is Slurm and GridEngine. We can expect this to affect most of our T2 sites. 3) One of the areas driving discussion at (and after) the GDB last week (http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=272795) was the adoption of a new benchmark - made more complicated with the evolving computing environment (i.e. considering how to account with cloud resources, multi-core and whole node etc.). 4) There is a WLCG multi-core Task Force kick-off meeting tomorrow (https://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=296031). SI-6 Tier-1 Manager's Report ----------------------------- AS reported as follows: Fabric: 1) Both disk and one CPU tranch now delivered. Last major item (second CPU tranch) delivering today. All on track for deployment. 2) We expect to carry out at least two major interventions on the Tier-1 network in the coming 6 weeks in order to attach to the site network at 40Gb/s. details being finalised. Service: Operations again very smooth last week. at: https://www.gridpp.ac.uk/wiki/Tier1_Operations_Report_2014-01-15 1) CASTOR a) Overheads reduced from 5% to 1% - extra space available in all service classes. SI-7 LCG Management Board Report --------------------------------- There had been no meeting. REVIEW OF ACTIONS ================= 496.2 PC to update the network forward-look. This was now pending information from RJ/DC. Done, item closed. 512.2 Regarding the outturn forecast and the possible spend on tape media, travel etc, DB/PG to work out what was left and ask Tony Medland for re-profiling. PG would take-over this action. Ongoing. 513.1 RJ/DC/PC each to provide a 1-page summary of functionality at the Tier-1 and Tier-2, including present situation and evolution. Ongoing. 513.2 PG to review the EVAL requirements and email everyone a summary and reminder. Ongoing. 513.3 DB to send to PG the EVAL information required. Ongoing. 513.4 DC to follow-up with Alex Efimov/Tom Whyntie regarding Simon's time on coding for bit-splitting work on Linux - DC to clarify the issues involved and report-back if a PMB decision was required. Ongoing. ACTIONS AS OF 20.01.14 ====================== 512.2 Regarding the outturn forecast and the possible spend on tape media, travel etc, PG to work out what was left and ask Tony Medland for re-profiling. 513.1 RJ/DC/PC each to provide a 1-page summary of functionality at the Tier-1 and Tier-2, including present situation and evolution. 513.2 PG to review the EVAL requirements and email everyone a summary and reminder. 513.3 DB to send to PG the EVAL information required. 513.4 DC to follow-up with Alex Efimov/Tom Whyntie regarding Simon's time on coding for bit-splitting work on Linux - DC to clarify the issues involved and report-back if a PMB decision was required. 514.1 PG to chase-up the sites regarding a line of information required from them to insert into SL's Tier-2 document. 514.2 DC/PC to provide information about their computing models to SL for the Tier-2 document. 514.3 RJ/DC to provide information to PC to enable him to complete the network forward-look. Next PMB Monday 27 January @ 12.55 pm.