 |
 |
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