Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

DESY / XFEL Deployment Scenarios

235 views

Published on

Overview by Martin Gasthuber, DESY

Published in: Software
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

DESY / XFEL Deployment Scenarios

  1. 1. PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving Sergey Yakubov, Martin Gasthuber (@desy.de) / DESY-IT Geneva, June 5, 2019
  2. 2. Page 2| PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 (National)
  3. 3. Page 3 DESY Campus Hamburg – much more communities Synchrotron radiation source (highest brilliance) VUV & soft-x-ray free-electron laser MPI-SD FLASH I+II PETRA III + X-Ray Free-Electron Laser atomic structure & fs dynamics of complex matter CHyN HARBOR CXNS NanoLab CWS
  4. 4. Page 4 sources of data • 3 active accelerators on-site (all photon science) – Petra III, FLASH and EuXFEL • currently 30 active experimental areas (called beamlines) - operated in parallel • more in preparation • Petra IV (future) – expect 104-5 more (raw) data - not all to be stored • FLASH21+ • majority of generated data is analyzed within a few months (cooling afterwards) • have two independent copies asap (raw & calibration data i.e. for EuXFEL) | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, May 2019
  5. 5. Page 5 DESY datacenter - resources interacting with ARCHIVER data processing resources before archiving • HPC cluster – 500 nodes, 30,000 cores, large InfiniBand fabric (growing) • GPFS – 30 building blocks, 30PB, all InfiniBand connected (growing) • BeeGFS - 3PB, InfiniBand connected • LHC computing - Analysis Facility + Tier-2, 1000 nodes, 30,000 cores (growing) • ~40% more resources outside the datacenter (mostly at experimental areas) current archiving capabilities • dCache - 6 large instances, 35PB capacity, >120 building blocks, Tape gateway • Tape – 2 x SL8500 (15000 Slots), 25 x LTO8, 8 x LTO6, >80PB capacity | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019
  6. 6. Page 6 data life cycle as of today - from the cradle to the grave • new archive service connected to ‘Core-FS’ and/or after dCache to fit seamlessly into existing workflow • this scenario will most likely use the full automated (API/CLI) archive system interface | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019
  7. 7. Page 7 PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving • end user workflows (3) • scientific data and user • admin workflow • service integration & planning • configuration based on site+community data policy and contracts between ● SIP == DIP (AIP should allow sequential media efficiently) ● Archival Storage - here is the ‘hybrid’ in ○ replication (horizontal) ○ multi tiering (vertical) - similar to HSMs ○ instances should run on distributes sites ● Archival Storage == instances of bit-stream-preservation ● Data Management + Ingest + Access == core of archive instance
  8. 8. Page 8 end user workflow 1 • individual scientist archiving important work (i.e. publication, partial analysis results, …) – DOI required • key metrics • Single archive size: average 10-100 GB. • Files in archive: average 10,000 • Total archive size per user: 5 TB • Duration: 5-10 years • Ingest rates: 10-100 MB/s (more is better) • encryption: not required, nice to have • browser based interaction (authentication, data transfers, metadata query/ingest) • cli tools usable for data ingest • metadata query • starting from a single string input (like Google search) - interactive/immediate selection response • change QOS - i.e. #replications after re-evaluating ‘value’ of that data • DOI generated - (like i.e. zenodo) for durable external references • mobile devices (tablet, phone, …) (tools + protocols) should not excluded | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 individual scientist – managing private scientific data (on its own generated and managed)
  9. 9. Page 9 end user workflow 2 • beamline (experimental station) specific + experiment specific, medium size and rate • key size parameters • Single archive size: average 5 TB • Files in archive: average 150,000 • Total archive size per beamline: 400 TB, doubles every year • Duration: 10 years • Ingest rates: 1-2GB/s • encryption: no required • 3’rd party copy - ‘gather’ all data from various primary storage systems - controlled from single point • local (to site) data transport should be RDMA based and operate (efficiently) on networks faster than 10Gbs • data encryption in transit not required • API + CLI for seamless automation - i.e. API manifested as Rest-API • CLI on Linux, API should support used platforms (focus on Linux but incl. Windows ;-) • MetaData • other methods (i.e. referencing/finding through experiment managing services) used in addition | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 beamline manager – mix of automated and experiment specific/manual archive interaction
  10. 10. Page 10 end user workflow 3 • large collaboration or site managing and controlling archive operations on behalf of (all experiments) - all automated and large scale • all inherited from previous workflow - except the manual part - all interactions automated • key size parameters • Single archive size: average 400 TB. • Files in archive: average 25,000 • Total archive size per beamline: 10s PB, doubles every year • Duration: 10 years • Ingest rates: 3-10GB/s - averaged over 1-3 hours • encryption: not required • bulk recall - planned re-analysis require bulk restore operation with decent rates (50% of ingest rate) (feed the compute engine) • async notification from archive on reaching certain states (i.e. data accepted and stored) to be updated in external DBs | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 Integrated data archiving for large standardized beamline/facility experiments
  11. 11. Page 11 site manager & administrative workflows • create and config core archive and related bit-stream-preservation instances • based on site and community data policies + contracts with community • create ‘archive profiles’ determining operation modes and limits (all what could generate costs ;-) • i.e. this includes tradeoffs between costs and data resiliency (probability of data loss) • select appropriate ‘bit-stream-preservation’ instances and hierarchy among them (i.e. replication) • setup further admin and end user accounts and their roles (authorizations) • delegation of limited admin tasks by group admins of community/groups • configure/setup AAI - i.e. local IDP • wide range of authentication methods usable (beside local site ones) – x509, OpenID, eduGAIN, … - more is better used to ‘authenticate’ and to be usable in ‘ACL’ like authorization settings (the identity or DN) • multiple authentication mapped to single ‘identity’ • setup role based model (identity select roles select archive profile) | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 integration, setup and control - workflow derived requirements
  12. 12. Page 12 site manager & administrative workflows • deployment scenarios (instance architectures) • deploy main services and esp. metadata store/query (Data Management+Ingest+Access in OAIS speech) • locally • in cloud (using remote service and storage/handling hardware for MD operations) • create/attach bit stream preservation layer (Archival Storage in OAIS speech) • local only • remote only • tiered - local and remote (i.e. remote tape) - remote could be ‘cooperating lab’, public cloud, … • (streaming) protocol to transfer data between tiers should support efficient and secure ‘wide area’ transfers • Deployment based on open standards / open source version preferrable • avoid vendor lock-in, assure long-term viability, benefit from wide community support • subscribing to paid support not excluded • commercial version not excluded as well (depending on the licencing model, exit strategy, etc.) | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 Deployment models/business models
  13. 13. Page 13 left over… • life cycle of archive objects (not bound to a single access session) - create, fill (meta)data, close - data becomes immutable, query • archive objects could be related to existing ones - i.e. containing new versions of derived data • all data access should be ‘stream’ based • no random access (within a file) is required • recalls of pre-selected files out of single archive object • network protocol ‘firewall friendly) - i.e. http* based • Billing • any ‘non-local’ deployment requires billing services and methods (obvious) seperated in service and storage costs (at least) • external storage resource - long term predictable costs/contracts preferred (less ‘pay as you go’) • per user and group billing (user may be member of several groups and groups might be nested) • encryption - in all cases is ‘nice to have’ - expecting issues with local ‘key management’ services • pre and post en/decryption of data in motion and/or at rest is a valid alternative • (Meta)Data formats • no special (known to the archive service) data formats required, thus no format conversions (without user interaction) required • Metadata, needs ‘exportable/importable’ to new/updated instances • Metadata - query engine should handle binary, strings, integer and date/time | PETRAIII/EuXFEL data archiving | Martin Gasthuber / Sergey Yakubov, June 2019 other thoughts, requirements and options

×