I will certainly send notification out in advance of this test. Our goal is to achieve 200MB/sec between SLAC and BNL in the first step. So ideally we want to have a 10Gb network so that we can do more than 50MB/sec. But I do not know when will we have 10Gb. I think we still have a chance to have 10Gb setup before the test. But we can't wait for the upgrade without participating any of such tests. I hope this test, if we have to do it under 1Gb, will not have too much negative impact to the rest of the lab. And I hope this e-mail exchange will serve as a call for 10Gb network upgrade ASAP.
regards,
--
Wei Yang | [log in to unmask] | 650-926-3338(O)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory P. Dubois-Felsmann [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 6:51 PM
> To: Halperin, John H.
> Cc: Yang, Wei; Cottrell, Les; Buhrmaster, Gary
> Subject: RE: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
>
> Certainly we must be notified before such a test, so that
> Wilko and others can properly diagnose any problems it might cause.
>
> I would very much prefer to wait for the 10GB upgrade, if possible.
>
> Gregory
>
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, John Halperin wrote:
> > It's not clear to me whether you're planning on doing this test
> > (50MB/s for 24hr) before the SLAC link is upgraded. If so, do you
> > know if such a test will impact other users, eg, Babar data
> > import/export?
> >
> > --
> > John Halperin <[log in to unmask]>
> > SLAC Computer Security Team (Stanford Linear Accelerator Center)
> >
> > ------------------ Prev Msgs ------------------
> > Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:54:57 -0800
> > From: "Yang, Wei" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: "Ernst, Michael" <[log in to unmask]>, Hironori Ito
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> > Cc: Jay Packard <[log in to unmask]>,
> > "Katramatos, Dimitrios" <[log in to unmask]>,
> > Joe Urbanski <[log in to unmask]>,
> > Rob Gardner <[log in to unmask]>, Dantong Yu <[log in to unmask]>,
> > "McKee, Shawn" <[log in to unmask]>,
> > Charles G Waldman <[log in to unmask]>,
> > RACF-STORAGE <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: RE: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
> >
> > SLAC is very interested in participating this test. There is a few
> > hurdles right now:
> >
> > 1) SLAC's external network is still 1GB. This limited the
> bandwide we
> > can contribute. However, I still hope we can at least contribute
> > 50MByte/s. We are planning to upgrade to 10GB in January.
> >
> > 2) For 50MB/s, a single GridFTP server is enough. But I hope we can
> > use SRM frontend. I am still waiting for a FTS channel to be setup
> > between BNL and SLAC SRM v2.2. There is no technical
> difficulty here.
> > The BNL-STAR channel already works with a testing SRM v2.2
> deployed on
> > SLAC's gatekeeper (However, we shouldn't run a production SRM on a
> > production gatekeeper).
> >
> > 3) We are looking for additional machines as GridFTP
> servers. Before
> > that will happen, I have borrowed two machines to run GridFTP. When
> > the lab reopens, we can have them setup.
> >
> > I hope we can get all these work before the middle of January.
> >
> > --
> > Wei Yang | [log in to unmask] | 650-926-3338(O)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ernst, Michael [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 1:29 PM
> > To: Hironori Ito
> > Cc: Jay Packard; Katramatos, Dimitrios; Joe Urbanski; Rob Gardner;
> > Dantong Yu; Yang, Wei; McKee, Shawn; Charles G Waldman; RACF-STORAGE
> > Subject: RE: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
> >
> > Thanks, Hiro.
> >
> > Yes, I kept watching the ganglia graphs while you were running the
> > tests and the results are quite encouraging.
> > Though we could argue the goal of having 3 sites is
> fulfilled ('guess
> > you did transfers to UM and MSU apart from UC?) I am still eager to
> > demonstrate we can do these transfers to 3 Tier-2s. Also,
> it would be
> > desirable to not only show the aggregate rate out of BNL
> but also the
> > rates at the receiving end. Last point is, we managed to
> achieve this
> > rate for only 20 minutes (or, you presumably stopped the test after
> > ~20 minutes). This is not convincing, I'm afraid, we need
> to show at
> > least 12 hours, 24 hours would even be better.
> >
> > Again, I appreciate the effort spent by everybody helping
> to achieve
> > this. Please take a look whether we can take a step further
> to raise
> > the level of confidence regarding our capabilities on our
> end, and to
> > please our funding agencies ...
> >
> > --
> > Michael
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hironori Ito [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 4:14 PM
> > To: Ernst, Michael
> > Cc: Jay Packard; Katramatos, Dimitrios; Joe Urbanski; Rob Gardner;
> > Dantong Yu; Wei Yang; McKee, Shawn; Charles G Waldman; RACF-STORAGE
> > Subject: Re: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > I wanted to get 600MB/s. But, since I don't get it, here is
> what I got
> > today. I got about 500MB/s by transferring to UM (two different
> > places) and UC. Although, it shows the entire transfer to/from BNL,
> > they are almost entirely from BNL to other sites since the dCache
> > write pools at BNL shows not much activity.
> >
> > Is this good enough?
> >
> > Hiro
> >
> > Ernst, Michael wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes, 500 MB/s combined at whatever distribution.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Michael
> >>
> >>
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> *From:* Jay Packard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 27, 2007 5:42 PM
> >> *To:* Ernst, Michael
> >> *Cc:* Hironori Ito; McKee, Shawn; Katramatos, Dimitrios;
> > Joe Urbanski;
> >> Rob Gardner; Dantong Yu; Charles G Waldman; RACF-STORAGE; Wei Yang
> >> *Subject:* Re: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
> >>
> >> Michael,
> >>
> >> Just to verify, you would like a total of 500 MB/s to
> these 3 sites
> >> combined (rather than 500 MB/s to each for a total of 1500 MB/s)?
> >>
> >> Jay
> >>
> >> Ernst, Michael wrote:
> >>
> >> This looks good, indeed.
> >>
> >> Now I need you to plan for a transfer exercise to show that
> > this can
> >> be sustained
> >>
> >> over an extended period of time (let's say for 24hours)
> >>
> >> to 3 Tier-2 sites at the same time (possible candidates:
> > AGLT2, MWT2,
> > WT2)
> >>
> >> at a level of 500 MB/s out of BNL to these sites (at whatever
> >> distribution)
> >>
> >> We should make an effort getting this done before the
> > DOE/NSF Review
> >> in early February. I know this may be difficult at MWT2 and
> > SLAC but
> >> it's worth the effort, because the agencies are really
> > concerned about
> >> this point.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Michael
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> *From:* Jay Packard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 27, 2007 4:40 PM
> >> *To:* Hironori Ito
> >> *Cc:* McKee, Shawn; Katramatos, Dimitrios; Rob Gardner;
> Joe Urbanski;
> >> Rob Gardner; Dantong Yu; Ernst, Michael; Charles G Waldman;
> >> RACF-STORAGE
> >> *Subject:* Re: [Racf-storagemgmt-l] Throughput update
> >>
> >> Oops, I sent the wrong graph - this is the correct one.
> >>
> >> Hironori Ito wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> Your cacti is not showing the values I am expecting.
> >> Look at the attached plot from ganglia about between 13:20
> and 13:40.
> >> You see about 200-250MB/s increase in the traffic. This is the
> >> correct value since I know how much I sent.
> >>
> >> 70 (files)* 3600 (MB per files) / (20 minutes * 60
> sec/minutes) = 210
> >> MB/sec
> >>
> >> By the way, what was the 1st target value (200 or 250?)
> >>
> >> Hiro
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> Gregory P. Dubois-Felsmann
> [log in to unmask]
> Experimental Physicist & BaBar Computing Coordinator
> tel: +1-650-926-4207
> Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, BaBar group
> fax: +1-650-926-3882
>
