1 / 4

Merging the Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs

Merging the Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs. Wahid Bhimji, Dirk Duellmann and other members of the working groups. Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs. 19 June 2012 MB created 3 storage working groups: Following on from Storage and Data TEG recommendations

keefe
Télécharger la présentation

Merging the Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs

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. Merging the Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs Wahid Bhimji, Dirk Duellmann and other members of the working groups

  2. Storage Interfaces and I/O Benchmarking WGs • 19 June 2012 MB created 3 storage working groups: • Following on from Storage and Data TEG recommendations • I/O Benchmarking; Storage [Management] Interfaces (SI); Federation. • Federation WG presented a “final report” in Feb GDB. • SI and Benchmarking presented interim ones in Mar GDB. • SI and Benchmarking groups progressing well (see GDB): • Coordinate existing activity within VOs / developers. • Neither activity will end soon: continuing need to stay engaged, monitor and ensure interoperability.

  3. Rationale for merger of groups and for wider mandate • SI and Benchmarking overlap in topics and personnel: • Almost all meetings of the groups so far have been “joint”. • Wider topics being discussed such as dataaccessinterfaces: • Areas with TEG recommendations that need following up on. • Affect same group of people - so want to avoid having separate meetings on these. • Overlap with the topics of these Working Groups – but not technically in their original mandate • Increase interest to members (e.g. CMS) who have less need for a SRM related discussion. • Current activities allow time for discussion on these topics.

  4. Propose WLCG Data/Storage Working Group (This merger agreed by existing Working Group chairs and members themselves ) • Initial work-streams for current activities of Storage Interfaces and Benchmarking: could continue with their current mandate and timescales – have joint meetings. • Group also mandated to follow-up on other TEG recommendations: • According to their importance – and if not being followed elsewhere. • Same goals as current groups: leveraging existing activities; ensuring coordination. • Group is long term/ ongoing : however each work-stream has finite timescale: • A new work-stream would provide its own motivation, mandate and timescales. • Group regularly update a standing milestone list and give regular joint reports at GDB. • Initial additional activities to be presented to next GDB (possible areas attached). • Once direction clear within a work-stream -> pass action to WLCG ops WG. • Core membership as currently – with ALICE involvement: • Involve other experts as appropriate (as with current WGs).

More Related