1 / 13

And if We D id it All Again…?

And if We D id it All Again…?. G. Lehmann Miotto. DAQ@LHC: What did I learn?. We’ve been extremely successful at solving the same problems in 4++ different ways For data-flow architectures one may still argue that differences were driven by Different experiment requirements

eyad
Download Presentation

And if We D id it All Again…?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. And if We Did it All Again…? G. Lehmann Miotto

  2. DAQ@LHC: What did I learn? • We’ve been extremely successful at solving the same problems in 4++ different ways • For data-flow architectures one may still argue that differences were driven by • Different experiment requirements • Different risk assessment/perception of experts • For online software (control, configuration, monitoring) it is really difficult to find a technical explanation • Different people naturally chose different options DAQ@LHC Workshop

  3. Today’s Online Systems • 4 well performing systems • still improving/evolving • Evolving technologies • Keep up • Explore and track • Profit • Increase automation & usability • Note that effort is needed also to KEEP the present perfection level! DAQ@LHC Workshop

  4. How Did We Get Here? • A challenging set of problems • The lack of early existing solutions caused research work to start independently, in parallel (even within experiments) • Initially plenty of human resources (read eager experts) organized in separate communities • R&D is what we love! • No expert would willingly give up his solution • Forcing convergence seemed counterproductive DAQ@LHC Workshop

  5. DCS Took a Different Path • Long initial discussions to agree on a (third party) solution • Customized to experiments’ needs • Integrated with in-house developed components • Coordinated outside individual experiments (JCOP) • We have working detector control systems for all experiments=> also this seems a valid approach DAQ@LHC Workshop

  6. What if We Did It All Again Today? • Still a challenging set of problems • R&D is still what we love • We are organized in separate communities • Except if there was a strong managerial decision… DAQ@LHC Workshop

  7. But… • We should keep in mind that we are working on an experiment lifetime of 20 – 30 more years • We are not even half way through • With how many (4 * re-implementations) should we count? • Will we maintain a similar level of resources in the long term? • Investment from institutes • Interest of new people • Therefore, it is not completely academic to ask ourselves… DAQ@LHC Workshop

  8. Where Do We Go from Here? • Possible options: • Continue as today • Pick up the best from each system / service/ component and “merge” into a common solution • Evaluate a new, common approach DAQ@LHC Workshop

  9. a) Continue as Today • After all…. nobody would expect religions to merge after an ecumenical gathering • It may be simplest to continue improving our own systems • Now that we know better what the other experiments are doing • We may ask for expert opinions before embarking onto the next software evolution • We may decide to pick up some of the ideas that were presented for other experiments and implement them in our system • We may choose to use common technologies in specific areas • We may even launch some common projects at the periphery of our systems DAQ@LHC Workshop

  10. b) Select & Merge • May seem a viable approach, but… • We’d face the problem of fitting a square peg into a round hole… • A patched solution to nobody’s satisfaction DAQ@LHC Workshop

  11. c) Go for a Common Approach • A major effort in social engineering/team building • If we want to have a chance of success • Take time to look at how other environments have tackled the problem • Computer centers • Distributed/networked control systems • Don’t exclude a priori to go the SCADA/OPC UA way • At the very least, agree on and choose a common middleware • The only way to keep the door open to “merging” later on DAQ@LHC Workshop

  12. Summary • So far we have been very successful with our independent solutions • The long experiment lifetime demands that we ask ourselves how to proceed • We will re-design & re-implement our systems a few more times • This workshop has offered the possibility to establish communication channels • Up to us to decide to what extent it’s better to work independently or together DAQ@LHC Workshop

  13. A Big Thanks To Clara, Vasco, Luciano for the preparatory workshop discussions and to ALL of you for this nice ecumenical workshop!

More Related