1 / 17

Towards URF 2.0 From a storage perspective

Towards URF 2.0 From a storage perspective. Jon Kerr Nilsen Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Oslo On behalf of the EMI StAR team. Outline. EMI and storage accounting Storage accounting vs. job accounting EMI StAR proposal Conclusion/way forward. Storage accounting in EMI.

jill
Download Presentation

Towards URF 2.0 From a storage perspective

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. Towards URF 2.0From a storage perspective Jon Kerr Nilsen Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Oslo On behalf of the EMI StAR team

  2. Outline • EMI and storage accounting • Storage accounting vs. job accounting • EMI StARproposal • Conclusion/way forward Jon Kerr Nilsen

  3. Storage accounting in EMI • From EMI Description of Work: • EMI will address known UR issues and extend accounting records to include VO-aware storage usage accounting • The refined and extended standard UR format, service interface and data transport protocol will be implemented in gLite, ARC, dCache and UNICORE • EMI will thus contribute to the definition of UR 2.0 of OGF • Not just an academic exercise for EMI Jon Kerr Nilsen

  4. Why storage accounting? • If there is no standard for storage accounting yet, do anyone actually need it? • Note: Storage resources are shared between VO’s – more than one owner • Developing a storage infrastructure • We need to know how much storage space is used, by which group/user, on which storage media • To know where to put the money when increasing the storage space • To know who to ask for the money to increase the storage space • Basis for billing • Storage is expensive • Some non-academic resource owners may not like to give it away for free Jon Kerr Nilsen

  5. Accounting • Accounting is the recording and summarizing of the consumption of a resource by an individual user or a group of users • Typically used to find out who uses how much of a set of resources • Typically not used to find out how individual resource components are used Jon Kerr Nilsen

  6. Storage vs. job accounting Job accounting Storage accounting Storage accounting is the recording and summarizing of the consumption of a storage resource Storage usage varies in time – recorded usage is only relevant in a given time frame Data is rarely in finished state and can live for a long time Typically recorded through (in)frequent usage snapshots – high fluctuation rate No standardized record • Job accounting is the recording and summarizing of the consumption of computing resources • Recording wall-time, cpu-time, etc. – strictly increasing values. • When a job finishes it stays finished • Typically measured per job – information readily available from local batch system • Standardized through UR 1.0 Jon Kerr Nilsen

  7. Storage vs. job summary • Storage records must be treated different than job records wrt. aggregation • Storage records need special treatment • Only valid between measurement time and expiration time • Can be invalidated if newer record is registered for same resource • Nontrivial processing model Jon Kerr Nilsen

  8. Processing model • Storage records can overlap in time – cannot simply sum up to identify total consumption • May be event based records – or taken every hour/day/month • Must ask for a certain point in time and sum up the most recent, still-valid records • To get usage per time, you must choose a set of timestamps and repeat process per time stamp – numerical integration Jon Kerr Nilsen

  9. Storage vs. job commonalities • Both job records and storage records have subject ID • URF 1.0 has no way to include VO info • URF 2.0 should support VOs • None of them care about network Jon Kerr Nilsen

  10. Why a separate storage record? • UR1 not readily extendable and is missing VO information • No draft for service record in UR 2.0 yet • EMI needs record format now to implement before end of EMI project • Decided to keep the StAR format close to OGF UR 1.0, but still separate • Merge with UR 2.0 when available Jon Kerr Nilsen

  11. EMI StAR • EMI is now finalizing a proposal for a storage accounting record (StAR) • Contacted and received input from organizations and potential user groups • NDGF, OGF, EGI, OSG, INFN, CMS, ATLAS, … • Not only an EMI in-house production • Current draft: StAR-EMI-tech-doc-v7.pdf • Final version will be proposed to OGF as a standard • Will be implemented by EMI storage providers • Work already started outside EMI (SGAS) Jon Kerr Nilsen

  12. StAR structure • Resource • Fields describing the system the resource was consumed on • StorageSystem, StorageShare • Consumption details • Fields describing what is consumed • StorageMedia, StorageClass, DirectoryPath, … • Identity • Describes the person or group accountable for the consumption • SubjectIdentity block (UserIdentity, Group, GroupAttribute, …) • Resource consumption • How much of the described resource has been used • ResourceCapacityUsed, LogicalCapacityUsed • Record identity and duration Jon Kerr Nilsen

  13. Local example <sr:StorageUsageRecord xmlns:sr="http://eu-emi.eu/namespaces/2011/02/storagerecord"> <sr:RecordIdentitysr:createTime="2010-11-09T09:06:52Z" sr:recordId="host.example.org/sr/87912469269276"/> <sr:StorageSystem>host.example.org</sr:StorageSystem> <sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:LocalUser>johndoe</sr:LocalUser> </sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:StorageMedia>tape</sr:StorageMedia> <sr:FileCount>42</sr:FileCount> <sr:MeasureTime>2010-10-11T09:31:40Z</sr:MeasureTime> <sr:ValidDuration>PT3600S</sr:ValidDuration> <sr:ResourceCapacityUsed>913617</sr:ResourceCapacityUsed> </sr:StorageUsageRecord> Jon Kerr Nilsen

  14. Grid example <sr:StorageUsageRecord xmlns:sr="http://eu-emi.eu/namespaces/2011/02/storagerecord"> <sr:RecordIdentitysr:createTime="2010-11-09T09:06:52Z" sr:recordId="host.example.org/sr/87912469269276"/> <sr:StorageSystem>host.example.org</sr:StorageSystem> <sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:Group>binarydataproject.example.org</sr:Group> <sr:GroupAttributesr:attributeType="subgroup">ukusers </sr:GroupAttribute> </sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:StorageMedia>tape</sr:StorageMedia> <sr:FileCount>42</sr:FileCount> <sr:MeasureTime>2010-10-11T09:31:40Z</sr:MeasureTime> <sr:ValidDuration>PT3600S</sr:ValidDuration> <sr:ResourceCapacityUsed>913617</sr:ResourceCapacityUsed> </sr:StorageUsageRecord> Jon Kerr Nilsen

  15. Full example <sr:StorageUsageRecordsxmlns:sr="http://eu-emi.eu/namespaces/2011/02/storagerecord"> <sr:StorageUsageRecord> <sr:RecordIdentitysr:createTime="2010-11-09T09:06:52Z” sr:recordId="host.example.org/sr/87912469269276"/> <sr:StorageSystem>host.example.org</sr:StorageSystem> <sr:StorageShare>pool-003</sr:StorageShare> <sr:StorageMedia>disk</sr:StorageMedia> <sr:StorageClass>replicated</sr:StorageClass> <sr:FileCount>42</sr:FileCount> <sr:DirectoryPath>/home/projectA</sr:DirectoryPath> <sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:LocalUser>johndoe</sr:LocalUser> <sr:LocalGroup>projectA</sr:LocalGroup> <sr:UserIdentity>/O=Grid/OU=example.org/CN=John Doe</sr:UserIdentity> <sr:Group>binarydataproject.example.org</sr:Group> <sr:GroupAttributesr:attributeType="subgroup">ukusers</sr:GroupAttribute> </sr:SubjectIdentity> <sr:MeasureTime>2010-10-11T09:31:40Z</sr:MeasureTime> <sr:ValidDuration>PT3600S</sr:ValidDuration> <sr:ResourceCapacityUsed>14728</sr:ResourceCapacityUsed> <sr:LogicalCapacityUsed>13617</sr:LogicalCapacityUsed> </sr:StorageUsageRecord> </sr:StorageUsageRecords> Jon Kerr Nilsen

  16. Way forward • Definition of StAR is a first step to establish common storage accounting record • May be a step forward to establish a common URF • Next jump (two steps in one go) • Propose StAR to OGF to start standardization process • Will take time • Will include further discussions • May lead to changes in StAR • EMI will take active part in this process • Implement StAR record into EMI storage middleware • Standardization process may take longer than EMI • Important to gain user experience with the definition if aiming for grid standard • Comments and input more than welcome! Jon Kerr Nilsen

  17. Contact: emi-jra1-data-sar@eu-emi.eu Web page: http://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/EMI/StorageAccounting Current StAR draft: http://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/EMI/StorageAccounting/StAR-EMI-tech-doc-v7.pdf http://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/EMI/StorageAccounting/StAR-EMI-tech-doc-v7.doc Thank you! Jon Kerr Nilsen

More Related