TWiki
>
LCG Web
>
DomaActivities
>
QoS
>
QoSSurveyAnswers
>
QosSurveyAnswersQ6
(2019-09-20,
OliverKeeble
)
(raw view)
E
dit
A
ttach
P
DF
---+ Question Question 6. Do you share any of your storage infrastructure with other (i.e., non-WLCG) communities? This question excludes commonly shared infrastructure, such as networking and monitoring.If you do share storage, what impact does that have on your choice of technologies? ---+ Answers ---++ CERN Yes. Numerous smaller HEP experiments. Impact on choice of technology - minimal, technology choice is driven by WLCG. HPC stuff, QCD, theory, beams, AMS (https://greybook.cern.ch/greybook/experiment/recognized). ---++ hephy-Vienna Some part of the storage is used by our local community. We choose EOS, as we expect that it addresses best the different needs. ---++ KI-LT2-QMUL Our site supports over 20 other VOs including SKA and LSST. storage needs to work for all stakeholders. A wlcg only solution is of no use to us ---++ UKI-LT2-RHUL Not yet but planning to share a HDFS ~1 PB. ---++ RO-13-ISS no impact ---++ Nebraska We do not share any bulk storage infrastructure. We do share things like backup disk vaults and VM iSCSI targets but these devices are not part of any resource available outside our operation. ---++ INFN-ROMA1 We do offer storage areas to other experiments, with no significant impact on the choices of our technologies as they are all integrated into a global, hyperconverged system ---++ NDGF-T1 No, not yet, but offering it to one or two new communities based on the solid storage technology we are running. ---++ BEgrid-ULB-VUB Yes, we share it with 2 other experiments. Only WLCG/CMS drives our choices, being our largest client. ---++ NCG-INGRID-PT Yes. We need to support HTP and HTC workloads with POSIX access. We also need to support cloud block storage and object storage. ---++ IN2P3-IRES We are sharing the storage with other non-LHC VOs (BELLE 2, biomed, France Grilles,local VOs, ...). As all these VOs are using DPM, it does not impact our technology choice. ---++ LRZ-LMU Not currently. But we are in discussion with other science communities to share the storage. ---++ CA-WATERLOO-T2 No sharing right now. If we did go in this direction, would explore StoRM on Lustre (though expect lower reliability in this configuration based on experience) ---++ CA-VICTORIA-WESTGRID-T2 dCache is also used by Belle. We also have Ceph storage that is used for our Openstack cloud but not for dCache. ---++ Taiwan_LCG2 We do share our storage infrastructure with other communities. The most impact on our choice of technologies is posix-direct access requirement from applications and workflows. So, we can only support such applications with CephFS or EOS-fuse. ---++ IN2P3-SUBATECH No (do not share) ---++ asd ---++ MPPMU yes ---++ INFN-LNL-2 No, our T2 storage is dedicated to CMS and ALICE ---++ Australia-ATLAS No ---++ SiGNET T3 clusters also run non-WLCG jobs. Some users at ARNES got used to dCache at ARNES to store larger amount of data for data processing on T3 clusters. ---++ KR-KISTI-GSDC-02 No, We provided the dedicated storage for WLCG Tier-2. Non-WLCG storage is physically separated. In addition, we have no plan to share the storage to non-WLCG community. ---++ UKI-LT2-IC-HEP Yes (for sharing, mainly astro and neutrino physics), no (for choice of tecnology) ---++ BelGrid-UCL ---++ UKI-SOUTHGRID-BRIS-HEP PheDex box is shared with RALPP & Oxford ---++ GR-07-UOI-HEPLAB No ---++ UKI-SOUTHGRID-CAM-HEP No ---++ USC-LCG2 NO ---++ EELA-UTFSM Yes ---++ DESY-ZN Yes. WLCG storage is not shared though, it is run on an independent dCache instance. ---++ PSNC Currently only DPM is shared, but we there is a plan to migrate DPM and XROOD to dCache. ---++ UAM-LCG2 No ---++ T2_HU_BUDAPEST no ---++ INFN-Bari NO ---++ IEPSAS-Kosice No we don't share any of our storage infrastructure ---++ IN2P3-CC Yes clearly, tape system is share by many other experiments and services, disk infrastructure (dcache and xrootd) are also share. Both case, WLCG activity is the bigger, but it is not necessary true for the next years. Site will support some others «big» experiments and we have to consider how we will share the storage infrastructures. Technologies choices have to be enough "generic" to allow us to satisfy the WLCG requirements (of course) but also the requirements of the others. We cannot have a (too) strong relationship between storage infrastructure and storage service. ---++ NONE_DUMMY blah ---++ WEIZMANN-LCG2 Yes, we have on Lustre file space supporting WLCG, local ATLAS and non-WLCG users. The non-WLCG users have more modest capacity and performance requirements than WLCG. ---++ RU-SPbSU ---++ USCMS_FNAL_WC1 Tier 1 is exclusively WLCG/OSG ---++ RRC-KI-T1 No, our storage is WLCG only. ---++ vanderbilt we're by far the biggest user, so it's our decision ---++ UNIBE-LHEP Shared the SE and the ARC cache / scratch with ht2k.org and microboone, all transparent. Would not change the dominant WLCG technologies for accommodating non WLCG communities. The other way around rather ---++ CA-SFU-T2 We have 3 dcache instances (for Atlas, SNO+, T2K). Plus we have a completely separate storage (about 50 PB on disks and 300 PB on tapes) for ComputeCanada general usage. All in the same machine room. ---++ _CSCS-LCG2 Yes we share some storage systems. The impact is that we chose systems that can provide (per customer) required performances in a shared environment. ---++ T2_BR_SPRACE NO ---++ T2_BR_UERJ No, we do not share our storage. ---++ GSI-LCG2 Our storage is shared with many local groups from different experiments. Therefore technologies cannot be chosen to fit only our use case. ---++ UKI-NORTHGRID-LIV-HEP Yes ---++ CIEMAT-LCG2 We do (as discussed above). The main impact is our interest in non-GSI authentication methods (especially Kerberos and token-based), and use of standard clients (NFS and WebDAV). In general, we also use more than one file replica for these communities, since they don't have replicas of data in other sites. ---++ a ---++ T2_US_Purdue No ---++ IN2P3-LAPP The site provides a unique cluster for all the computing activities: grid (WLCG and EGI VOs) and local activities (batch). Therefore, the distributed file system available across the cluster is shared among all users of the cluster. ---++ TRIUMF-LCG2 We don't share our storage with other non-WLCG communities; however the Tier-1 centre is co-located within a shared data centre facility serving both WLCG (Tier-2) and non-WLCG communities via a common infrastructure for electrical, cooling and wide area networking. The WAN connectivity and capacity are not an issue. ---++ KR-KISTI-GSDC-01 For the moment, we do not share the storage allocated to ALICE VO with other communities. It is dedicated. If we should share this storage with other VOs, first of all we will consider the operational cost, which means we will choose any storage type or protocol that are mostly compatible with and are easy-to-manage. We have another storages for the other VOs. For this purpose, we procured NAS (network attached storage) and it is shared among different VOs, mostly domestic research communities. Recent NAS storage is easy to manage disk space and we are happy with it. ---++ GRIF Yes, but without impact, other communities are more or less obliged to adapt to WLCG ---++ IN2P3-CPPM share with other egi vo but wlcg vo are much bigger and choice are made according to WLCG ---++ IN2P3-LPC Yes, others VOs are supported ---++ IN2P3-LPSC Yes (but few amount) ---++ ZA-CHPC no ---++ JINR-T1 Yes, no impact ---++ praguelcg2 Yes. Impact: still use SRM in our DPM ---++ UKI-NORTHGRID-LIV-HEP Yes, local research groups store some data on our DPM service, with local storage servers added to the pool. Access is via standard grid-compatible tools (eg xrootd) but we are dropping this in favour of local storage clusters with more standard POSIX interfaces. ---++ INDIACMS-TIFR NO, all of our infrastructure is for WLCG ---++ TR-10-ULAKBIM No. ---++ prague_cesnet_lcg2 NO ---++ TR-03-METU No ---++ aurora-grid.lunarc.lu.se Yes, our central IBM spectrum scale is a shared storage to all compute notes. ---++ SARA-MATRIX_NKHEF-ELPROD__NL-T1_ yes. none ---++ FMPhI-UNIBA WE do not share our storage infrastructure with other (i.e., non-WLCG) communities. ---++ DESY-HH We explore storage technologies and will continue in the future, especially for archiving. ---++ T3_PSI_CH - ---++ SAMPA Yes, with local user directory, in this case don't have impact in our choice ---++ INFN-T1 Yes, we do share our storage infrastructure with other communities (about 40 mainly high energy physics, astrophysics and gravitational waves), many of them are asking for POSIX data access ---++ GLOW We share negligible amount of storage with non-CMS VOs. This doesn't constrain our choice of technologies. ---++ UNI-FREIBURG no ---++ Ru-Troitsk-INR-LCG2 No ---++ T2_Estonia Our selected technologies (ceph) support other infrastructure quite well and we did not had prefer one to another. ---++ pic We run dCache and support around 15 VOs. Around 75% of the disk space is used by LHC experiments. Each disk server deployed in PIC is used by only one specific VO. This reduces VO destructive interferences in the servers, and we are quite happy with this configuration which is running since several years. Also, the big experiments use their own front-ends to dCache, and small-VOs used generic front-ends. Also SRM is deployed in this way. Hence, there is no real interference among VOs. ---++ ifae We run dCache and support around 15 VOs. Around 75% of the disk space is used by LHC experiments. Each disk server deployed in PIC is used by only one specific VO. This reduces VO destructive interferences in the servers, and we are quite happy with this configuration which is running since several years. Also, the big experiments use their own front-ends to dCache, and small-VOs used generic front-ends. Also SRM is deployed in this way. Hence, there is no real interference among VOs. ---++ NCBJ-CIS The storage is shared via different services. We never had a problem to find a technology which could support both WLCG and non-WLCG activities. ---++ RAL-LCG2 Both Disk and Tape storage services are shared with other communities. Tape is roughly a 50:50 split while disk is currently closer to 80:20 (in favour of the WLCG). The disk contribution from other communities is growing. Other communities do not like using HEP specific solution (e.g. SRM, XRootD). Our strategy is to provide industry standard APIs from which each community can far more easily build their own layer on top. ---++ T2_IT_Rome No ---++ BNL-ATLAS We have separate dCache instances for non-WLCG communities. On the tape side, one single HPSS manages tape systems for ATLAS and other non-WLCG VOs, but each community has its own dedicated tape storage class service (library/tape drives/tapes/network). The choice of technologies have traditionally been driven by WLCG communities, because of their large user base and high demand on resources. ---++ FZK-LCG2 We share the network and storage infrastructure among all the HEP experiments we support. No interference is expected. ---++ INFN-NAPOLI-ATLAS no -- Main.OliverKeeble - 2019-08-22
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
Watch
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r3
<
r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
WYSIWYG
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r3 - 2019-09-20
-
OliverKeeble
Log In
LCG
LCG Wiki Home
LCG Web Home
Changes
Index
Search
LCG Wikis
LCG Service
Coordination
LCG Grid
Deployment
LCG
Apps Area
Public webs
Public webs
ABATBEA
ACPP
ADCgroup
AEGIS
AfricaMap
AgileInfrastructure
ALICE
AliceEbyE
AliceSPD
AliceSSD
AliceTOF
AliFemto
ALPHA
Altair
ArdaGrid
ASACUSA
AthenaFCalTBAna
Atlas
AtlasLBNL
AXIALPET
CAE
CALICE
CDS
CENF
CERNSearch
CLIC
Cloud
CloudServices
CMS
Controls
CTA
CvmFS
DB
DefaultWeb
DESgroup
DPHEP
DM-LHC
DSSGroup
EGEE
EgeePtf
ELFms
EMI
ETICS
FIOgroup
FlukaTeam
Frontier
Gaudi
GeneratorServices
GuidesInfo
HardwareLabs
HCC
HEPIX
ILCBDSColl
ILCTPC
IMWG
Inspire
IPv6
IT
ItCommTeam
ITCoord
ITdeptTechForum
ITDRP
ITGT
ITSDC
LAr
LCG
LCGAAWorkbook
Leade
LHCAccess
LHCAtHome
LHCb
LHCgas
LHCONE
LHCOPN
LinuxSupport
Main
Medipix
Messaging
MPGD
NA49
NA61
NA62
NTOF
Openlab
PDBService
Persistency
PESgroup
Plugins
PSAccess
PSBUpgrade
R2Eproject
RCTF
RD42
RFCond12
RFLowLevel
ROXIE
Sandbox
SocialActivities
SPI
SRMDev
SSM
Student
SuperComputing
Support
SwfCatalogue
TMVA
TOTEM
TWiki
UNOSAT
Virtualization
VOBox
WITCH
XTCA
Welcome Guest
Login
or
Register
Cern Search
TWiki Search
Google Search
LCG
All webs
Copyright &© 2008-2022 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use
Discourse
or
Send feedback